Shri Tara Singh (deceased) vs The State of Punjab

J.V. Gupta, J.—Agricultural land measuring 47 Kanals 15 Marlas belonging to Lara Singh (now deceased) situate in the area of village Ahal Rodla, Tehsil Fazilka was acquired by the State of Punjab for remodelling Mauzam drain and the notification u/s 4 of the and Acquisition Act was published on 17th April, 1963. The said land comprised of 39 Kanals 18 Marlas of Nehri land 7 Kanals 15 Marlas of Barani land and 2. Marlas of Banjar Jadid land The Land Acquisition Collector gave an award on 23rd April 1965. He awarded compensation to the claimant @ Rs. 800/- per acre for Nehri land @ Rs. 500/- per acre for Barani land and Rs. 200/- per acre for Banjar Jadid land. On reference u/s 18 of the land Acquisition Act, the learned Additional District Judge framed the following issues:--

1 Whether the claim petition is within time?

Whether the claimant did not put in claim u/s 9(2) of the Land Acquisition Act and as such now he is debarred from claiming compensation at a higher rate? Onus on State.

Whether the claimant received the amount of compensation without making any protest? If so, its effect ? Onus on State.

Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation at a higher rate and to what extent? Onus on claimant.

Relief

Issue No. 1 was decided in favour of the appellant as the claim petition was held to be within time no evidence was adduced by the State of Punjab in support of issue No. 2 and, therefore, it was decided against the respondent. Under issue No. 3 it was found that the claimant received the amount of compensation under protest. Under issue No. 4 relating to the amount of compensation, the learned Additional District Judge came to the conclusion that the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector was adequate and the claimant was not entitled to compensation at a higher rate. Dissatisfied with the same, the claimant has filed this appeal, claiming a sum of Rs. 10,000/- more by way of compensation for the land acquired.

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that there is a copy of mutation Ex. A2 which shows that 45 Kanals 13 Marlas of land was sold for Rs. 12,300/- on 3rd February 1964. Out of that land 34 Kanals 7 Marlas was Nehri and 11 Kanals 11 Marlas was Barani which is also situate in the area of village Ahal. According to the learned counsel the said sale having taken place after about 9 1/2 months from the publication of the notification u/s 4 of the Act was a valid piece of evidence and should have been taken into consideration for awarding the compensation which, according to the learned counsel, if calculated, comes to Rs. 2143/- per acre In support of his contention he referred to the State of Punjab v. Inder Singh (1969) 71 P.L.R. 1034.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the evidence on record The learned Additional District Judge ignored the said sale by virtue of mutation Ex. A2 on the ground that it had taken place about 9 1/2 months after the publication of the notification and therefore the same was not relevant for determining the market value of the land acquired This approach, in my opinion, is not correct. It has been held in Inder Singh''s case (supra) that for determining the market value of the acquired land one had to see the sale transactions in respect of similar lands in the locality within a reasonable time of the publication of the section 4 notification. Generally, the valuation of the acquired land is fixed on the basis of sales at or about the time of notification u/s 4. The date of sale for comparison should ordinarily be close to the date of section 4 notification. However, bona fide transactions subsequent to the notification can also sometimes be taken into consideration. They are not always altogether to be ignored in this view of the matter, mutation Ex A2 could not be altogether ignored in the present case. If that is taken into consideration then the appellant is entitled to much more amount than claimed by him in this appeal. As stated earlier he has only claimed a sum of Rs. 10,000/- more in the present appeal Under the circuit stances, the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,000/- more by way of compensation in addition to the amount awarded by the Collector.

It was next contended that no amount has been allowed either by way of interest or as solatium as provided under the Land Acquisition Act On the last date of hearing the counsel for the State took time to produce the copy of the award given by the Collector to find out as to whether any solatium, etc., was allowed or not. In spite of two adjournments, the State has failed to produce the copy of the award for perusal by this Court. It was made clear in the last order dated 26th November, 932 that in case the copy of the award by the Collector is not produced it will be presumed that no amount of interest or solatium was allowed to the appellant having failed to produce the copy of the award there is no option but to presume that the appellant was not allowed any interest or solatium as provided under the Act. Therefore, the appellant will also be entitled to the interest and solatium as provided under the Act, in addition to the amount of compensation.

As a result of the above discussion this appeal succeeds and is allowed to the extent indicative above, with costs.