Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2014 DIGILAW 1395 (SC)

Union of India v. Jai Singh

2014-12-16

A.K.SIKRI, H.L.DATTU, MADAN B.LOKUR

body2014
ORDER C.A. NOS. 4470-4549 OF 2012, 6650-6717 of 2012, 7721-7759 of 2013, 8713-8729/2013, 11332 of 2013 1. Dr. Surat Singh, learned counsel for the appellant(s), on instructions, seeks leave of this Court to withdraw these appeals. 2. Permission sought for is granted. 3. The Civil appeals are disposed of as withdrawn. IN REST OF THE MATTERS FILED BY INDIVIDUALS/CLAIMANTS 4. Delay, in filing of the application(s) for substitution, if any, is condoned. 5. Application(s) for substitution, if any, is allowed. 6. Application(s) for impleadment, if any, is allowed. 7. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi, dated 23.08.2011, whereby and whereunder the High Court has enhanced the compensation awarded by the Reference Court. 8. The short facts in the present set of appeals are: the respondent-State, by eight different notifications dated 07.08.2000, 11.09.2000, 02.05.2001, 22.08.2001, 07.12.2001, 16.05.2002, 23.05.2002 and 27.01.2003 issued under Section 4 read with Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") had proposed to acquire various tracts of land in the ten villages, namely, Pooth Khurd, Holambi Kalan, Bawana, Khera Khurd, Narela, Ali Pur Holambi, Rajpur, Rajapur Kalan, Sanoth, Shahpur Garhi for the purposes of either establishing an industrial estate or laying down a road or freight complex, except in the case of village Narela, where the acquisition was partly for residential purpose and partly for industrial purpose. The said notifications were followed by respective notifications issued under Section 6 of the Act where the respondent-state declared the acquisition of aforesaid lands for the aforementioned public purpose. 9. The compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short, "the LAC"), the Reference Court upon reference being made under Section 18 of the Act and the High Court, in appeal against the orders passed by Reference Court are as under : S.No. Name of the Village Date of notification under Section 4 of the Act Rates awarded by LAC in per acre Rates awarded by Reference Court u/s 18 of the Act in per acre Rate awarded by High Court under the Act in per acre 1 Pooth Khurd 07.08.2000 Category `A' 13.82 & category 'B' 12.26 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 Category uniform 14.3782 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 with 12% increase p.a. 14,75,000/- 2. Holambi Kalan 07.08.2000 13.82 minimum price as 1.4.2000 14.1295 price as in Gajraj's case as of 15.11.199 6 with 12 % increase p.a. 14,75,000/- 3. Holambi Kalan 22.08.2001 Category "A' 15.7 & Category 'B' 14 minimum price as 01.04.2000 Category uniform 16.43811 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 with 12% increase p.a. 16,74,500/- 4. Holambi Kalan 23.05.2002 15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 Rs.22.142 39 price as in Gajraj's case as of 15.11.199 6 with 12% increase pa. (compound) 18,65,500/- 5. Bawana 07.08.2000 Category 'A' 13.82 & Category 'B' 12.62 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 No enhancement given 14.75/- lakhs 6. Khera Khurd 11.09.2000 Category 'A' 13.82 & Category 'B' 12.62 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 Category uniform 14.40157 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 with 12% increase pa. 7. Narela 02.05.2001 Category 'A' 15.7 Category 'B' 14 minimum price as of 1.4.2000 Category uniform 15.857 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 17,75,000/- 8. Ali pur 22.08.2001 Category 'A' 15.7 & Category 'B' 14 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 16,43811 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 9. Ali pur 23.05.2002 15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 17,8524 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 18,65,500/- 10. Holambi 22.08.2001 15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 16,4381 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 11. Rajpur 22.08.2001 15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 16.43811 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 16,74,500/- 12. Rajapur Kalan 27.01.2003 Category 'A' 15.7 & Category 'B" 14 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 1. 19.137 65 for uniform category Minimum price as 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. in some cases 2. 19.1604 for uniform category based on sale deed dated 25.5.2002 with 12% increase p.a. 19,16,000/- 13. Sanoth 07.12.2001 Rs.15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 Rs.16.999 042 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 17,29,500/- 14. Sanoth 27.01.2003 Category 'A" 15.7 Category 'B' & category 'C' 12.3 14 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 19.13765 for uniform category. Minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 15. Shahpur Garhi 23.05.2002 Category A 15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 17.79781 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with compound interest @ 11.5 % p.a. 18,65,500/- 10. Sanoth 27.01.2003 Category 'A" 15.7 Category 'B' & category 'C' 12.3 14 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 19.13765 for uniform category. Minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with 12% increase p.a. 15. Shahpur Garhi 23.05.2002 Category A 15.7 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 17.79781 minimum price as of 1.4.2001 with compound interest @ 11.5 % p.a. 18,65,500/- 10. Aggrieved by the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Delhi, the claimants are before us in these appeals/special leave petitions requesting, inter alia, for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the High Court. 11. We have heard Shri Guru Krishna Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India and learned counsel for the claimants appearing in respective matters. We have also perused the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Courts and authorities below. 12. In our considered view, the High Court has correctly assessed fair and true market value of the acquired lands taking into account the relevant exemplars and, thereafter appropriately calculated the market value of the acquired lands by means of calculating their average values. Further, the High Court has duly considered the potentiality of the respective acquired lands and noted the benefits offered by their location and surroundings. 13. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the High Court has not committed any error, whatsoever, that requires our interference and decision in these appeals and special leave petitions. 14. In the result, these appeals and special leave petitions filed by the claimants are liable to be dismissed and are dismissed accordingly. No costs. Matters filed by the Union of India: 15. The appeals/special leave petitions filed by the Union of India, are also before us in this batch of matters. 16. Since the said appeals/special leave petitions also arise out of the same impugned judgment and order of the High Court as the claimants appeals/special leave petitions, we would not saddle this order by noticing the facts extracted hereinabove. 17. Having heard learned counsel for both the parties to the lis, we are of the considered opinion that the said appeals/special leave petitions, being devoid of any merit, require to be dismissed. 18. In the result, the appeals/special leave petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs. Ordered accordingly.