Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1697 (HP)

State of Himachal Pradesh v. Beli Ram

2015-11-18

RAJIV SHARMA

body2015
JUDGMENT : RAJIV SHARMA, J. 1. This regular first appeal is directed against the award of the learned Addl. District Judge, Shimla, H.P. dated 24.9.2007, passed in Land Ref. No. 42-R/4 of 2004/99. 2. “Key facts” necessary for the adjudication of this regular first appeal are that the land of the respondents was acquired for the purpose of construction of road. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued on 22.2.1996. It was published in the Rajpatra on 2.3.1996. It was also published in two newspapers i.e. Dainik Tribune on 12.3.1996 and Jansatta on 14.3.1996. Wide publicity of this notification was got done through Tehsildar concerned on 25.3.1996. No objection was received from the concerned interested land holders within the prescribed period. Consequently, notification under Sections 6 & 7 of the Act were published on 20.3.1997. It was published in the Rajpatra on 12.4.1997 and in two newspapers i.e. Indian Express and Weekly Giri Raj on 14.7.1997. The copies of the declaration under Section 6 & 7 of the Act were got delivered amongst the interested holders of the village through Tehsildar concerned on 7.5.1997. Notices under Section 9 of the Act were issued to the interested holders on 1.10.1997 requiring them to appear before the Land Acquisition Officer on 17.10.1997 at Camp Rest House, Rohroo at 11:00 AM. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded a sum of Rs. 500 per bighas alongwith the statutory benefits vide award dated 24.11.1997. 3. The respondents filed petition under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of compensation. According to them, the acquired land was part and parcel of Rohroo town. Modern facilities like road, education, medical, telephone, electricity, college etc. were available near the vicinity of the acquired land. There is sub-station of HPSEB, HP PWD workshop, water lifting station, Settlement Office, Office of the Excise and Taxation Officer within the radius of half kilometer of the land acquired. It was near Seema Rohru road. The value of the land at the time of notification was more than Rs. 12 lacs per bigha. The land was very fertile and orchard also existed thereupon. They claimed Rs. 15 lacs per bigha instead of Rs. 500/- per bighas as awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. They also sought compensation of Rs. 3 lacs on account of loss of fruit bearing trees. 4. 12 lacs per bigha. The land was very fertile and orchard also existed thereupon. They claimed Rs. 15 lacs per bigha instead of Rs. 500/- per bighas as awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. They also sought compensation of Rs. 3 lacs on account of loss of fruit bearing trees. 4. The petition was allowed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Shimla on 24.9.2007. He assessed the market value of the land at Rs.6000/- per biswa. In addition, the land holders were also held entitled to a sum of Rs.3,28,070/- on account of the value of fruit trees which existed on the land so acquired. Hence, this petition at the instance of the State. 5. Mr. Parmod Thakur, Addl. Advocate General for the State has vehemently argued that the market value of the land has been assessed at the higher rate. He then contended that the land holders were not entitled to any compensation for the orchard. On the other hand, Mr. G.S.Rathore, Advocate, has supported the award dated 24.9.2007. 6. I have heard learned Advocates for the parties and gone through the award and records of the case carefully. 7. PW-1 Jawahar Kaith has produced the statements of price index. PW-2 Bhajan Dass has proved receipts Ext. PW-2/A to PW-2/C issued in favour of the claiments. PW-3 N.K.Mehta has given the details of the fruit bearing trees of the claimants vide Ext. PW-3/A and Ext. PW-3/B. PW-4 Beli Ram deposed that the possession of the land was taken in the month of October-November, 1996. He has proved copy of jamabandi Ext. PW- 4/A-B. According to him, he used to produce 400-500 boxes of apple and used to earn Rs. 1.80 lac per year. PW-5 Mohinder Singh deposed that NAC was near at a distance of 1 ½ km. from the acquired land. PW-6 Laiq Ram deposed that the land was acquired for the construction of the road. The decision was taken in the year 1995-96. The land was at a distance of 1 km. from the general Bus Stand and ½ km. from the boundary of NAC. He has raised orchard on the land. PW-7 Kanha Singh deposed that the land was acquired for the construction of road. The possession was also taken. He has raised apple orchard over the same. Their land was bifurcated into two blocks. PW-8 Hem Singh has proved sale deed Ext. PW-6/C. 8. Mr. from the boundary of NAC. He has raised orchard on the land. PW-7 Kanha Singh deposed that the land was acquired for the construction of road. The possession was also taken. He has raised apple orchard over the same. Their land was bifurcated into two blocks. PW-8 Hem Singh has proved sale deed Ext. PW-6/C. 8. Mr. Parmod Thakur, Addl. Advocate General for the State has argued that Ext. R-1 and R-2 should have been taken into consideration. However, these have not been proved in accordance with law. Neither vendor nor vendees have been produced by the Department. It has come on record that the land was fertile. It was situated at a close proximity of the boundary of NAC. The modern facilities like telephone, electricity, College etc. were in the close vicinity of the acquired land. There is sub-station of HPSEB, HP PWD workshop, water lifting station, Settlement Office, Office of the Excise and Taxation Officer within the radius of half kilometer of the land acquired. It was near Seema Rohru road. It was a valuable piece of land. The learned Addl. District Judge, Shimla, has correctly relied upon copy of award passed on 16.6.2007 which was based on earlier award dated 3.3.2003, whereby the market value of the land was assessed at Rs. 6,000/- per biswa. 9. The learned Addl. District Judge, Shimla, has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,28,070/- for the value of plants after relying upon the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Ramesh Chand and others vrs. Land Acquisition Collector, reported in Latest HLJ 2003 (HP) 977. The land holders/claimants were entitled to compensation for the loss of trees separately. The learned Addl. District Judge, Shimla has correctly assessed the market value of the land and trees and awarded statutory benefits in accordance with law. 10. Consequently, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application (s), if any.