National Highways Authority Of India vs Tara Devi Jain And Ors

This first appeal is filed by the appellant- National Highways Authority of India, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, challenging the judgment and award dated 30.6.2012 in L.A. Ref. Case No. 12 of 2006 arising out of L.A Case No. 2 of 2003-2004 by which the learned Special Judge-cum-Special Judge of Land Acquisition, Hazaribag has enhanced the compensation amount in respect of 11 decimals of land which has been acquired to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- per decimal.

Total 11 decimals of land were acquired by the State Government for the benefit of National Highways Authority of India. The said 11 decimals of land comprise of Plot No.2122, 2124, 2125 and 2126 in several Khatas within the district of Hazaribagh. Further constructed building was also acquired. In lieu of the said acquisition, compensation amount of Rs. 8690/- was fixed in respect of 11 decimals of land and for the constructed area Rs. 39685/- was fixed. The respondents herein objected the said compensation amount and on the objection raised by her, a reference was made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the market price of the land so acquired. In the reference proceeding, the claimant did not appear before the Land Acquisition Judge rather filed her application annexing a copy of the sale deed to suggest that the market value of land is Rs. 20,000/- per decimal.

The appellant appeared and they contested the claim. Several documents were also exhibited on behalf of the respondents which were marked as exhibit. The Land Acquisition Judge thereafter considered the materials on record and held that the respondents-land looser herein failed to prove, by sufficient evidence, that the compensation paid in respect of constructed area is low and thus held that amount of Rs. 39685/- awarded on account of acquisition of the construction is justified. So far as market price of 11 decimals of land is concerned the Land Acquisition Judge held that the correct market price would be Rs. 20,000/- per decimals and the land looser is entitled to get the same.

Challenging the said award, so far as it relates to compensation of 11 decimals of land, the National Highways Authority of India has moved this Court by filing this appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that admittedly the respondents -land loosers failed to appear before the Land acquisition Judge in support of her claim. She submits that when the land-loosers failed to appear before the court, it will be deemed that she has not placed any sufficient evidence in support of her claim that the amount of compensation is low. She submits that the Land Acquisition Judge has rightly rejected the reference case. She submits that claimant has to stand on his own legs and in this case she failed to substantiate her claim that the compensation is low thus the entire judgment is just. She submits that the court below has taken into consideration the sale deed which was filed on behalf of the appellant but since the applicant has failed to appear and got the said document exhibited, the court below could not have relied upon the same. She relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in 1988 (3) SCC 751 in case of Chimanlal Hargovinddas Vrs. Special Land Acqisition Officer and submits that the reference has to be treated as an original proceeding and the claimant is in the position of plaintiff to show that the price offered for the land in the award is inadequate. She submits that reference court is not court of appeal and it is not open to the court to suo-muto exercise powers unless there are materials on record.

Counsel for the respondents has appeared in this case and contested this appeal. He admitted the fact that the claimant failed to appear before the court below.

He submits that even if the claimant failed to appear, there are sufficient materials on record, by way of evidence, which would suggest the correct market price, and on that basis the court below has correctly assessed the market price of the land as Rs. 20,000/- per decimal. He submits that the sale deed which was placed by the claimant is not disputed and in fact the reference of the said sale deed is found in the documents exhibited by the respondents themselves, thus the genuineness of the sale deed and the sale price mentioned therein cannot be overlooked. He submits that the sale deed is of the land which is just contiguous to the land which has been acquired and thus it is the most appropriate document to arrive at a conclusion about the correct market price.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and I have gone through the records.

The main contention of the appellant is that the claimant has failed to prove her case as she did not appear before the Land Acquisition Judge. She has further tried to plead that without their being any material, just relying on one document, the market price has been assessed.

This proceeding is under Land Acquisition Act. Admittedly 11 decimals of land of the respondents have been acquired. Structure was also acquired. As per the claimant, since the compensation was inadequate, she raised a dispute which was referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is an admitted case that the claimant has not appeared before the court below. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a decision reported in 2002 (2) SCC 242 in the case of Khazan Singh Vrs. Union of India has held that reference under Section 18 cannot be dismissed in default. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Civil court is duty bound to pass an award in answer to the reference. It has also been held that non-participation by any party would be at such parties own risk. It is necessary to quote paragraph nos. 6 and 7 of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:-

"6. S.18 of the Act empowers a person interested in the land to move a written application to the Collector requiring that the matter be referred for determination of the court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of compensation, the person to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.

If the application for reference is in order, the Collector is bound to make a reference of it to the court. S.20 of the Act enjoins on the court to proceed to determine the objection". The court shall after holding such inquiry as may be necessary pass an award. S. 26 of the Act reads thus:

"26 Form of Awards-

1) Every award under this part shall be in writing signed by the judge, and shall specify the amount awarded under clause first of Sub-s.(1) of S.23, and also the amounts (if any) respectively awarded under each of the other clauses of the same sub-section, together with the grounds of awarding each of the said amounts.

2) Every such award shall be deemed to be a decree and the statement on the grounds of every such award, a judgement within the meaning of S.2,Cl.(2) and S.2,Cl. (9), respectively, of the code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The provisions above subsumed would thus make it clear that the civil court has to pass an award in answer to the reference made by the Collector under S.18 of the Act. If any party to whom notice has been served by the civil court did not participate in the inquiry it would only be at his risk because an award would be passed perhaps to the detriment of the concerned party. But nonparticipation of any would not confer jurisdiction on the civil court to dismiss the reference for default."

From the aforesaid decision and the law laid down, it is quite clear that when a reference is made the same has to be answered, even if any of the parties do not appear before the court below. In this case since the respondent claimant had not appeared, it does not mean that court should have dismissed the claim.

If there are legal materials on record with the help of which the court can decide what would be the correct market price, the court has to take into consideration, the said documents and proceed to determine the fair market price, even if parties do not appear. Thus, the contention of the appellant that the Court could not have decided the issue is not accepted by this Court.

Now, the second question would be as to whether the court has correctly assessed the market price and was there any sufficient evidence before the court below to arrive at such a conclusion/decision. As stated above with the application, the claimant filed one sale deed. The said sale deed is numbered as 6268 and was executed on 2.5.2002. This sale deed is admittedly prior to the initiation of acquisition which was started in the year 2003. The said sale deed involved 8 decimals of land and the sale value was Rs. 1,60,000/- for 8 decimals.

On behalf of the respondents a chart has been exhibited as Exhibit-A which is a sale chart of that area in respect of lands for the year 2000-2003. From perusing the said chart which is an exhibit of the appellant, I find that the said chart has been prepared by the Government Officials which, gives value of the lands which were sold from 2000-2003 in the vicinity. Specific sale deeds along with date and the value has been mentioned therein. Reference of 13 sale deeds have been given of the year 2002 and one of them is the same deed i.e Deed No. 6268 dated 2.5.2002 which has been relied upon by the respondents-land looser. This clearly suggests that the deed which the respondents has relied upon and placed before the court along with application is a genuine document and said document cannot be doubted. By filing the said chart i.e Exhibit-A the respondents also relies upon the same. Court below after going through the said documents has held that the said document i.e sale deed is the best document, basing on which the market price can be assessed. The reason for this is that the said sale deed is of the land which is just contiguous to the land of this respondent, which has been acquired in this case. After going through the sale deed the court found that one of the boundary of the land which was sold by virtue of the aforesaid sale deed is the land which belong to the respondent of this case and has been acquired. This clearly suggests that both the lands i.e land covered by the sale deed and the land involved in the present acquisition proceeding are just contiguous. On 2.5.2002 eight decimals of land was sold for Rs. 1,60,000/.

Be it noted that this acquisition is of the year 2003 thus the aforesaid sale deed is the best document to arrive at a conclusion about the sale price. The area covered by the sale deed is 8 decimals and the area involved in the acquisition is 11 decimals. Thus there is no much difference in the area of land. Thus court below has rightly concluded that the market price of the acquired land would be Rs. 20,000/- per decimal and the sale deed is the best document to arrive at such conclusion. Thus, I find no illegality in the said award. Though the respondent had not appeared before the Land Acquisition Judge but the Land Acquisition Judge had sufficient legal evidence before him to answer the reference holding that the sale price would be Rs. 20,000/- per decimal.

So far as valuation of the construction is concerned the Learned Judge had accepted the rate fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer and has dismissed the claim of the claimant. Against the said dismissal no appeal has been filed by the claimant. It means that the claimant has accepted the said valuation.

In view what has been discussed above, I find that judgment passed by the District & Additional Session Judge cum Special Judge Land Acquisition, Hazaribag in L.A Ref. Case No. 12 of 2006 needs no interference. Thus this appeal stands dismissed.