Mangat vs State of Haryana

M.S. Liberhan, J.—This order will dispose of Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 146 to 168, 218 to 226, 542 to 546, 563 to 599, 601 to 620,

624 to 648, 851 to 872 of 1995, 4 to 28, 30 to 42, 257 to 264, 279, 296 to 298, 301, 379, 393 to 398 and 798 to 802 of 1996 as common

question of law and fact is involved in these appeals.

These appeals arise out of the order of learned Single Bench dated 1.9.1994 vide which compensation at the rate of Rs. 61,400/ per acre has

been awarded as the market value of the acquired land.

The undisputed morsel facts and the evidence which has come on record run thus :

1130 Acres 5 Kanals and 4 Marlas of land was acquired vide notification dated 22.3.1985. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market

value of the land as under :

Chahi

: Rs. 50,000/ per acre

Magda

: Rs. 45,000/ per acre

Bhud

: Rs. 40,000/ per acre

Banjar

: Rs. 35,000/ per acre

Gair Mumkin

: Rs. 20,000/ per acre

The learned Additional District Judge, keeping in view the potentiality of the land in dispute, being near the village Abadi and National Highway

No. 8 around which various institutions have come up and treating the village in view of the developed situation, as a town, assessed the market

value at Rs. 59,290/ per acre.

The learned Single Bench applying the principle of `average'' in assessing the market value of the land in dispute, assessed the average market

value at Rs. 81,764/ per acre prevailing on the date of notification but applying a cut of 25% on the sale deeds produced by the appellants as well

as the respondents as the lands involved in these sale deeds ranged between 2 Kanals to 8 Kanals only and that too located either at a sufficient

distance or too remotely from the land in dispute, determined the market value of the land in dispute at Rs. 61,400/ per acre.

Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that principle of average cannot be applied in the instant case and highest market value of

the land is to be taken into consideration. However, learned counsel for the appellants has failed to advance any persuasive argument to come to

the conclusion that by applying the principle of average in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the learned Single Judge has erred in

any manner much less substantially. Though, the Hon''ble Supreme Court has in a case, observed that principle of average cannot be applied, but

the observations were made in the context and facts of the said case inasmuch as there was only 25 kanals of land which was acquired while herein

more than 1100 acres of land has been acquired and the sale instances relied upon by both the parties are the sale instances of small pieces of land

upon which even the Collector relied while assessing the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 50,000/ per acre. The award of the Collector has

never been challenged by the Union of India or by the State Government. To some extent rule of thumb has to be adopted in assessing the market

value of the acquired land, particularly when only a scanty evidence by way of sale instances is available on record.

The conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge, are a finding of fact, arrived at after due appraisal of evidence. Even if there may be a

second view possible, yet it would not be a fit case to interfere for reversal of the judgment on finding of facts, in exercise of appellate powers.

Consequently, we affirm the findings of the Hon''ble Single Judge with which we agree.

Learned counsel for the Union of India has though very meakly attempted to persuade that market value cannot be given at Rs. 61,400/ per

acre suggesting that the market value of the land should be assessed at a rate lower than the rate assessed even by the Collector. We find no merit

in the argument of the learned counsel, particularly when the Union of India has never challenged the award of the Collector either before the

District Judge or before this Court.

Thus in totality, the finding of fact arrived at by the Hon''ble Single Judge being just, we find no ground to interfere in the appeal. Consequently, this

appeal as also the appeals filed by the State and the Union of India are dismissed with no order as to costs.