Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 19 (HP)

State of H. P. v. Sawarn Dass

2020-01-01

SANDEEP SHARMA

body2020
JUDGMENT : Sandeep Sharma, J. 1. Since all the above captioned appeals as well as Cross Objections, having been filed by the respective parties, are directed against the award dated 27.06.2015 passed by learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla, the same are being taken up together for adjudication with the consent of learned counsel representing the parties. 2. By way of all the aforementioned appeals, filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as well as Cross Objections in the respective appeals, filed under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter after referred to as 'CPC'), challenge has been laid to a common award dated 27.06.2015 passed by learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla in Land Reference Petition No. 7-4 of 2014/11, titled as: Sawaran Dass vs. State of H.P. and Others, alongwith other connected Land Reference petitions, as described in the award. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. 4. It is not in dispute that suit land belonging to claimants-respondents came to be acquired for public purpose; namely; construction of "Thana - Turan Road" and acquisition proceedings commenced with the issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act on 01.08.2005. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'LAC') passed award No. 46/08 on 29.09.2008 and awarded compensation of the acquired land as per the classification of the land mentioned in the award. 5. Claimants, who are respondents in all the above mentioned appeals, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the amount awarded by LAC, preferred Reference Petitions under Section 18 of the Act, seeking therein enhancement of compensation. Learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla, after framing issue and recording evidence of both the parties as well as after hearing the parties, vide impugned award dated 27.06.2015, redetermined the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 1627.44/- per square meter. 6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned award dated 27.06.2015, passed by learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla, the appellants-State, in all the aforesaid appeals, has approached this Court for setting aside the impugned award. 7. 1627.44/- per square meter. 6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned award dated 27.06.2015, passed by learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla, the appellants-State, in all the aforesaid appeals, has approached this Court for setting aside the impugned award. 7. It is not in dispute before this Court that similar situate claimants, whose land also came to be acquired for construction of "Thana - Turan Road" in the acquisition proceedings commenced with the publication of Notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 01.08.2005, had filed land reference petitions before the learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla, praying therein to enhance the compensation awarded by LAC, which were decided and the compensation enhanced. The awards so passed were under challenge in this Court in several other appeals. One of such appeal, RFA No. 368 of 2014, titled as The Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and Another vs. Narayan Singh & Others (for short "Narayan Singh's case") came to be decided alongwith its connected matters by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 12.10.2018. This judgment, in turn, has been followed in RFA No. 222/2015, titled as The Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and another vs. Chanan Singh and others alongwith analogous matters, decided on 12.10.2018. It is seen that this Court, on re-appraisal of the given facts and circumstances as well as the evidence available on record, has re-determined the market value of the acquired land as Rs. 2700/- per centiare and enhanced the compensation alongwith consequential statutory benefits accordingly. 8. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, representing the appellants-State, while fairly acknowledging the factum with regard to passing of judgment dated 12.10.2018 in Narayan Singh's case (supra), conceded that claimants in the cases at hand are also entitled to enhanced market value of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 2700/- per centiare alongwith all consequential statutory benefits as per the said judgment. 9. 2700/- per centiare alongwith all consequential statutory benefits as per the said judgment. 9. At this stage, it may be noticed that, Claimants-Cross Objectors have filed Cross Objections bearing Cross Objection No. 147 of 2016 in RFA No. 59 of 2016, Cross Objection No. 2 of 2017 in RFA No. 60 of 2016, Cross Objection No. 148 of 2016 in RFA No. 61 of 2016, Cross Objection No. 1 of 2017 in RFA No. 62 of 2016 and Cross Objection No. 4 of 2017 in RFA No. 67 of 2016 respectively under Order 41 Rule 22 CPC praying therein for enhancement of compensation of award amount passed by learned District Judge (Forest) qua the acquired land. 10. Since this Court has held the claimants entitled for enhanced market value of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 2700/- per centiare alongwith consequential statutory benefits, instead of Rs. 1627.44, in view of judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Narayan Singh's case (supra), Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly conceded that cross-objectors/claimants are also entitled to similar enhancement of compensation i.e. Rs. 2700/- per centiare alongwith consequential statutory benefits qua their acquired land as per their share. 11. Mr. B.S. Chauhan, learned Senior Counsel representing claimants-cross objectors, also acceded to the market value of the land determined in Narayan Singh's case (supra), and, accordingly, it is ordered that directions contained in Narayan Singh's case supra, shall mutatis mutandis apply to the cases of claimants-cross objectors also. 12. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made hereinabove as well as fair stand adopted by Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General representing the appellants-State, all the aforementioned appeals are dismissed and respective Cross Objections are allowed and it is ordered that directions contained in RFA No. 368 of 2014, titled: The Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and Another vs. Narayan Singh and Others case supra shall mutatis mutandis apply in the present cases also. 13. Appellant-State is directed to deposit the entire award amount in the Registry of this Court within a period of eight weeks from today, if not already deposited. 14. Interim orders, if any, in all the appeals are vacated. All the miscellaneous applications are disposed of.