Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 823 (HP)

Land Acquisition Collector, H. P. PWD v. Om Dutt

2019-07-01

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2019
JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. 1. Both these appeals take exception to the impugned award dated 5.6.2014 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-II, Solan in Petition No. 18FTC/4/2009, therefore, the same are taken up together for consideration and are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. The land of the claimants, situated in Village Ser Banera, was notified for acquisition vide notifications dated 24.10.2008 and 29.11.2008 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’) for the purpose of construction of Solan-Jaunjai- Dharja Road. After completing necessary formalities under the Act, the Land Acquisition Collector awarded a sum of Rs. 48,409/- and Rs. 15,765/- in favour of the claimants. 3. Aggrieved by the inadequacy of the compensation, the claimants preferred reference petition under Section 18 before the learned Additional District Judge-II, Solan, who vide his award dated 5.6.2014 allowed the petition and held the claimants to be entitled to an uniform rate of Rs. 50,000/- per biswa along with all statutory/consequential benefits under the Act. 4. Feeling dissatisfied with the impugned award being highly excessive, the State has preferred RFA No. 148/2015, whereas the claimants also being aggrieved by the inadequacy of compensation, have preferred RFA No. 151/2015 before this Court. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully. 6. At the outset, it needs to be observed that this Court in RFA No. 163/2012, titled as Land Acquisition Collector, H.P. PWD and Another vs. Om Dutt and Others, decided on 1.7.2019 has upheld the award, dated 25.4.2011, Ext.PW-1/C passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Solan, whereby an uniform rate of Rs. 41632/- per biswa has been granted to the claimants. 7. 41632/- per biswa has been granted to the claimants. 7. Though, the award in that case had been passed with respect to the land situated in Villages Bagur and Ser Banera for construction of rising main line of drinking water supply scheme to Solan Town and its suburb areas from Giri River, but then it would be noticed that notification under Section 4 in the aforesaid case was issued on 19.3.2005, whereas in the present case, notifications under Section 4 of the Act were issued after a period of about three years on 24.10.2008 and 29.11.2008 and obviously, there is bound to be a rise in the market price of the land and enhancement as granted by the learned court below is about 20% and cannot therefore be faulted with. It has specifically come on record that Village Gaura is adjoining to Villages Bagur and Ser Banera and fall in different Tehsils, i.e. Kandaghat and Solan, but the lands in these three Villages are similar in nature and have same potentiality. 8. Thus, there is no occasion for either of the parties to have filed the instant appeals more particularly in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Land Acquisition Officer, Kheda and Another vs. Vasudev Chandrashankar and Another, (1997) 11 SCC 218 , wherein it was held that judgments and awards of the court are best piece of evidence, which can safely be relied upon by the courts while determining the market value of the land at the relevant time. 9. The aforesaid legal position was thereafter reiterated in subsequent judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Gurbax Singh (dead), (2008) 11 SCC 65 . 10. In view of aforesaid discussion, I find no merit in these appeals and the same are accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Pending applications if any, also stands disposed of.