Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1923 (HP)

Sant Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector

2014-12-16

RAJIV SHARMA

body2014
JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. This regular first appeal is directed against the award passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla, dated 18.08.2004, in Land Ref. No. 3-S/4 of 2000. 2. Key facts, necessary for the adjudication of this regular first appeal are that the Government of Himachal Pradesh had issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 11.3.1998. It was published in the H.P. Rajpatra on 28.3.1998. It was also published in two newspapers i.e. Jansatta and Dainik Tribune on 7.5.1998. The notification was issued under Section 6 & 7 on 7.4.1999. These were published in H.P. Rajpatra on 22.4.1999 and two newspapers i.e. Punjab Kesari and The Tribune on 12.5.1999 and 13.5.1999, respectively. It was also brought to the notice of the general public through the Tehsildar, Kotkhai on 5.5.1999. Notice under Section 9 of the Act was issued to the interest holder(s) on 10.5.1999. They were directed to appear before the Land Acquisition Collector on 27.5.1999. The Land Acquisition Officer made the award on 5.6.1999. 3. The present appeal has been filed for enhancement of the amount. 4. Mr. G.D.Verma, Sr. Advocate, appearing for the appellant has vehemently argued that the learned District Judge has not assessed the market price of the land and 'Gharat’ in accordance with law. On the other hand, Mr. J.S.Guleria, learned Asstt. Advocate General, vehemently argued that the road was constructed in the year 1993 and only one wall of the 'Gharat’ was damaged. 5. I have heard the learned Advocates for the parties and gone through the records of the case carefully. 6. The notification, as noticed hereinabove, was issued under Section 4 of the Act on 11.3.1998. It was published in H.P. Rajpatra on 28.3.1998. All the codal formalities were completed and award was made by the Land Acquisition Collector on 7.6.1999. According to the appellant, the market value of the agriculture land was not less than one lac rupees per bigha at the time of issuance of the notification dated 11.3.1998. PW-1 Sh. Anant Ram Negi has deposed that the market value of the land was Rs. 25,000/- per bishwa. However, the appellant has not produced any record to prove that any sale transaction has actually taken place at Chak Jungle Kambli, where the land was acquired. The respondents have place on record sale transaction Ext. PW-1 Sh. Anant Ram Negi has deposed that the market value of the land was Rs. 25,000/- per bishwa. However, the appellant has not produced any record to prove that any sale transaction has actually taken place at Chak Jungle Kambli, where the land was acquired. The respondents have place on record sale transaction Ext. R-1 whereby 1-15 bighas of land situated in Village Shawala has been sold for a consideration of Rs. 23,000/-. The learned District Judge, on the basis of the land acquired at Village Shawala has assessed the market rate at Rs. 22,280.40 per bigha. 7. Mr. G.D.Verma, learned Sr. Advocate, has vehemently argued that the three walls of the 'Gharat’ of the appellant were damaged in the year 1985 alongwith the water channel and remaining wall was damaged in the year 1993. According to him, the appellant was earning Rs. 5,000/- and has incurred a loss of Rs. 1,00,000/-. 8. PW-1 Anant Ram, has deposed that the 'Gharat’ (Water Mill) was functional for the last 40 years. However, when the road was constructed in the year 1984 from Prem Nagar to Chander Nagar and Chander Nagar to Halaila, the three walls of the 'Gharat’ (Water Mill) and water channel were damaged. The 'Gharat’ became non-functional in the year 1985. According to him, the value of the 'Gharat’ was more than Rs. 1,00,000/-. The income from the 'Gharat’ has come to an end. He has admitted in his cross-examination that he could not produce any cogent evidence about the income from the 'Gharat’. He has also not led any evidence to prove the value of the land. 9. PW-2 Ramesh Chand has supported PW-1. He has deposed that the 'Gharat’ was in existence. He used to visit the same. However, the 'Gharat’ was damaged when the road was constructed in the year 1985 alongwith the water channel. 10. PW-3 Prem Parkash, Patwari has proved Ext. P-3. However, in his cross-examination, he has admitted that he has never remained Patwari of this Patwar Circle and he has never seen the 'Gharat’ of the appellant. 11. The road was constructed on 17.7.1993 on this particular portion of the land. The appellant has not led any cogent evidence except the self serving statement of PW-1 Anant Ram that the 'Gharat’ was in existence and three walls were damaged in the year 1985 at the time of construction of the road. 11. The road was constructed on 17.7.1993 on this particular portion of the land. The appellant has not led any cogent evidence except the self serving statement of PW-1 Anant Ram that the 'Gharat’ was in existence and three walls were damaged in the year 1985 at the time of construction of the road. Infact, the 'Gharat’ was already damaged and one wall was damaged during the construction of the road in the year 1993. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded a sum of Rs. 2157/- and the same has been upheld by the learned District Judge vide award dated 18.8.2004. In case the 'Gharat’ of the appellant was damaged in the year 1985, he should have definitely taken action against the respondents. Though the appellant has failed to plead any tangible evidence, as noticed hereinabove, that the 'Gharat’ was damaged in the year 1985, but the fact of the matter is that one wall was damaged in the year 1993. The award made by the learned District Judge whereby he has enhanced the amount for acquisition of the land to Rs. 22,280.40 per bigha is upheld. The appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is held entitled to a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for the damage caused to one wall of 'Gharat’ (Water Mill) situated on Kh. No. 10 in the year 1993, with all statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, to be paid within ten weeks from today.