Chhotu Wd/o Rek Ram vs State of Haryana

G.S. Singhvi, J.—These appeals are directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the Regular First Appeals filed by the appellants for enhancement of compensation in respect of the acquired land.

The land of the appellants was acquired for construction of "Parna Drain" in Village Parna, Tehsil and District Jind. The Land Acquisition Collector, Jind determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 20,000/ per acre. The learned Additional District Judge, Jind, who decided 15 reference applications by a common order, enhanced the compensation from Rs. 20,000/ to Rs. 25,000/ per acre. The regular first appeals filed by the petitioners for further enhancement of the compensation were dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

In these appeals, the only contention urged by Shri Ramesh Hooda, learned counsel for the appellants is that the learned Reference Court as well as the learned Single Judge have gravely erred in not giving the benefit of enhancement of compensation visavis the compensation awarded by Ex.P.2. He submitted that the learned Additional District Judge as well as the learned Single Judge should have taken into consideration the fact that the land covered by Ex.P.2 was acquired in the year 1978 whereas the land in question was acquired after 2 years i.e. in the year 1980. He submitted that the annual enhancement of 12% in the amount of compensation awarded by Ex.P.2 should have been granted to the appellants.

We have thoughtfully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and agree with him that even though the land in question was acquired for the same purpose and Ex.P.2 has been rightly made basis for awarding compensation to the appellants, the increase in the prices should have been taken into consideration while awarding compensation to them. This is an accepted proposition of law that if the land is acquired for the same purpose, then the compensation awarded for the later acquisition should be higher than the compensation awarded for the previous acquisition. In our opinion, enhancement in the compensation at the rate 12% per annum would be justified keeping in view the rising trend in the prices. The principle of general increase has been accepted by the Supreme Court in Meharban and others v. State of U.P. and others, 1997(6) S.C.C. 54.

Hence, we partly allow the appeals and direct the respondents to pay increased compensation to the appellants by adding the annual increase of 12% in the amount of Rs. 25,000/ per acre. The period of the increase shall be counted form the date of the award Ex.P.2 and the date on which the Land Acquisition Collector passed his award. The appellants shall also be entitled to get proportionate increase in the amount of solatium etc. payable to them in terms of Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

Appeals partly allowed.