Shri Rameshwar Singh Tanwar and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Valmiki J Mehta, J.—The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the ''said Act'') is to the impugned judgment and decree dated 27.3.2009 answering the reference against the Appellants and denying the enhancement of compensation as also the statutory benefit of interest under the said Act.

The facts of the case are that the land of the Appellants comprising of 4 big has and 14 bis was situated in the Khasra No. 2341, of village Basaidarapur was proposed to be acquired by issuance of a notification u/s 4 of the said Act on 13.11.1959. Declaration u/s 6 was thereafter issued on 23.11.1963 and the Award No. 1717/1964 was thereafter passed on 29.5.1964. In terms of the Award, Appellant was granted compensation of Rs. 2,500/- per bigha besides other statutory benefits. The Appellants being dissatisfied sought reference u/s 18 of the said Act and which resulted in the impugned judgment.

Learned Counsel for the Appellants has placed reliance upon a judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 15.4.1980 in RFA No. 401/1971 titled as Khushi Ram and Ors. v. Union of India and in which case the compensation @ Rs. 14/- per sq. yard was granted for a notification dated 24.4.1957 u/s 4 for acquisition of lands in the same village for undeveloped lands and compensation at Rs. 17/- per sq. yard was granted for the developed land. Learned Counsel for the Appellants says that the aforesaid rate of Rs. 14/- per sq. yard is liable to be enhanced by 6% per annum in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Bedi Ram Vs. Union of India and another, . The Appellants also pray for grant of interest which has been denied by the trial Court for the period from 6.5.1965 to 9.9.2002. The counsel for the Union of India has per contra argued that the land of the Appellants was full of pits and therefore the trial Court has rightly distinguished the case of Khushi Ram (supra) which was cited before it.

A reading of the impugned judgment and the Award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector shows that though there were some pits on the land, however, it is not as if the land was completely full of pits. Since there were some pits on the land consequently this aspect will have to be borne in mind while determining the compensation to be awarded. The issue is whether the case of Khushi Ram (supra) can be distinguished on this ground.

In my opinion, the trial Court erred in distinguishing the case of Khushi Ram (supra) and the argument, in this regard, on behalf of the Respondent No. 1, is not correct that the compensation should not be awarded @ Rs. 14/- per sq. yard. The argument of Union of India is not correct because in the case of Khushi Ram (supra) itself land was put into two categories i.e. undeveloped land and developed land. For the undeveloped land, compensation was granted @ Rs. 14/-, and for the developed land compensation was granted @ Rs. 17/- per square yard. The undeveloped land would not be land which is developed for a colony but it would basically mean undulating land that is not properly and fully leveled. Surely, in undeveloped land there would not be proper leveling and it is for this reason that the compensation has been awarded at lower than the developed land which would indicate a proper leveling of the subject land. I am, therefore, of the opinion that undeveloped land will include land in which there are certain pits and that there is therefore no valid reason to distinguish the applicability of the judgment of Khushi Ram (supra). Appellants would therefore be entitled to compensation @ Rs. 14/- per sq. yard along with yearly increase of 6% per annum in terms of the decision in the case of Bedi Ram (supra). On applying the aforesaid appreciation of 6% per annum, compensation therefore would be payable at Rs. 15.84/- per square yard. On this amount, Appellants will also be entitled to solatium of 30%. Appellants will also be entitled to interest on the solatium in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sunder v. Union of India 93 (2001) DLT 596. Appellants will further also be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of dispossession till the payment/deposit of compensation for the first year and 15% per annum thereafter till payment/deposit. I clarify that the Appellants will not be entitled to any interest for the period from 6.5.1965 to 9.9.2002 in view of the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case Chander Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Another, inasmuch as proceedings under Sections 30/31 were stayed as per the statement of the present Appellants. In any case, this issue has already been held against the Appellants in terms of the judgment dated 17.11.2005 of the trial Court in this very case and which judgment having not been challenged has become final. Decree sheet be prepared. Trial Court record be sent back.