Radhey Sham vs The State Of Haryana

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7391 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. /2022 @ Diary No. 17442/2022) Radhey Sham …Appellant

Versus

The State of Haryana and Others …Respondents

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7372 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 14374/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7371 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 15110/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7204-7222 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18065-83 /2022 @ Diary No. 30556/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7346-7349 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18404-7 /2022 @ Diary No. 20177/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7223-7230 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No.18086-93/2022 @ Diary No. 30644/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7233-7234 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18094-95/2022 @ Diary No. 30715/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7373-7390 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18408-25 /2022 @ Diary No. 27043/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7350 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18403 /2022 @ Diary No. 21596/2022) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7351-7370 OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18383-402/2022 @ Signature Not Verified Diary No. 26794/2022) Digitally signed by NIRMALA NEGI Date: 2022.10.17

JUDGMENT

17:54:49 IST Reason:

1

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common

judgment and order dated 04.03.2022 passed by the High Court of

Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in R.F.A. No. 2016/2021 and other

allied First Appeals, by which the High Court has allowed the said First

Appeals preferred by the respondents herein – State of Haryana and

others and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order dated

31.05.2014 passed by the Reference Court and has restored the awards

declared by the Land Acquisition Collector determining the amount of

compensation with respect to the lands acquired at village Hansi and

Dhana, District Hisar, Haryana, the original landowners have preferred

the present appeals.

2. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are as under:

That the land situated at village Hansi and Dhana, District Hisar,

Haryana admeasuring 229.13 acres and 20.77 acres respectively came

to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act 1894’) for development of the

residential and commercial sectors – Sectors 3, 5 & 6 at Hansi. A

common notification under Section 4 of the Act 1894 was issued on

29.08.2005. That declaration under Section 6 of the Act 1894 was

issued on 29.08.2006. The land Acquisition Collector declared the

2 award under Section 11 of the Act 1894 on 3.8.2007, vide award Nos. 1

& 2 for both villages, Hansi & Dhana, by adopting the belting

method/system and assessed the market value of the land abutting the

G.T. Road (Delhi-Hisar Road) at Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre up to the depth

of 2 acres and for the land abutting the Jind By-pass Road, at Rs.

10,00,000/- per acre up to the depth of 2 acres and for the remaining

land, the market value was assessed at Rs. 8,00,000/- per acre.

2.1 That at the instance of the landowners, the references were made

to the Reference Court. By common judgment and order dated

31.05.2014, the Reference Court allowed the respective reference

petitions filed by the landowners and assessed the market value at

Rs.1,000/- per square yard (Rs. 48,20,000/- per acre).

2.2 Having not satisfied with the amount of compensation determined

by the Reference Court, the landowners preferred first appeals before

the High Court for enhancement of compensation. At this stage, it is

required to be noted that so far as the State is concerned, the State

accepted the common judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 passed by

the Reference Court determining the amount of compensation/market

value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard. That the High

Court, by common judgment and order dated 28.05.2016 passed in RFA

No. 7324/2014 and other allied first appeals, allowed the said first

appeals preferred by the landowners and assessed the market value of

3 the acquired land at Rs. 4,173/- per square yard, relying upon the

decision of this Court in the case of Ashrafi and Others v. State of

Haryana and Others, (2013) 5 SCC 527.

2.3 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common judgment and

order passed by the High Court dated 28.05.2016 passed in RFA No.

7324/2014 and other allied first appeals, the original landowners as well

as the State preferred appeals before this Court. By judgment and order

dated 16.05.2018, this Court allowed the appeals preferred by the State

and set aside the judgment and order dated 28.05.2016 passed by the

High Court and remitted the matter to the High Court for fresh

consideration. While setting aside the judgment and order dated

28.05.2016 passed by the High Court, this Court observed that the High

Court committed an error in determining compensation at Rs. 4,173/- per

square yard, considering the decision of this Court in the case of

Ashrafi (supra). This Court observed that as the land in the case of

Ashrafi (supra) was acquired in the year 1995 and was a very small

piece of land and it was for a commercial purpose and in the present

case the land has been acquired in the year 2005 and thus there is a

gap of about 10 years between the two acquisitions, relying on such an

acquisition of a decade ago may be unsafe.

2.4 That thereafter on remand, the High Court vide common judgment

and order dated 28.08.2019 remitted the matter to the Reference Court

4 by observing that some sale instances/sale exemplars relied upon on

behalf of the landowners were not taken into consideration by the

Reference Court. Therefore, the High Court remanded the matter to the

Reference Court by observing that it would be appropriate that the

Reference Court as such examines the issue threadbare and after

examining the sale deeds produced from both sides comes to the

conclusion that what is the correct market value.

2.5 That thereafter on remand, the Reference Court assessed the

amount of compensation at Rs. 750/- per square yard. The common

judgment and order passed by the Reference Court on remand

assessing the compensation/market value at Rs. 750/- per square yard

was the subject matter before the High Court at the instance of the

landowners as well as the State. By the impugned common judgment

and order, the High Court has dismissed the appeals preferred by the

landowners and allowed the appeals preferred by the State and has

restored the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector. By the

impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court, the

amount of compensation is reduced between Rs. 166/- per square yard

to Rs. 200/- per square yard.

2.6 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common

judgment and order passed by the High Court, the original landowners

have preferred the present appeals.

5

3. We have heard learned Senior Advocates/counsel appearing on

behalf of the respective original landowners and Shri Alok Sangwan,

learned Additional Advocate General along with Dr. Monilka Gusain,

learned counsel for the State of Haryana.

3.1 Learned Senior Advocates/counsel appearing on behalf of the

original landowners have vehemently submitted that as such the State

accepted the earlier judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 passed by

the Reference Court determining the market value at Rs. 1,000/- per

square yard and the landowners preferred appeals before the High Court

for enhancement of compensation. It is submitted that once the State

accepted the earlier judgment and order passed by the Reference Court,

allowing the reference petitions, and determining the market value at

Rs.1,000/- per square yard, the landowners are entitled to the

compensation at least at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard.

3.2 It is submitted that even while disposing of the appeals by this

Court in the common judgment and order dated 16.05.2018, this Court

also specifically observed that the State had not preferred appeals

and/or challenged the judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 passed by

the Reference Court and the original landowners preferred appeals for

enhancement. It is therefore submitted that in that view of the matter,

the High Court ought not to have allowed the appeals preferred by the

State and reduced the amount of compensation below Rs. 1,000/- per

6 square yard, which as such was accepted by the State Government by

not preferring appeals at the relevant time.

3.3 Some of the learned Senior Advocates/counsel appearing on

behalf of the original landowners have taken us to the sale deeds

produced by the landowners. Relying upon those sale deeds, it is

submitted that the claimants shall be entitled to the amount of

compensation at more than Rs.1,000/- per square yard.

4. While opposing the present appeals, learned Additional Advocate

General appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently submitted that

once the matter was remanded by this Court to the High Court and

thereafter by the High Court to the Reference Court for fresh decision,

even thereafter the Reference Court assessed the amount of

compensation at Rs. 750/- per square yard, vide common judgment and

order dated 29.01.2020. It is therefore submitted that merely because at

the relevant time and for whatever reasons the State did not prefer

appeals against the judgment and order passed by the Reference Court

dated 31.05.2014 determining the compensation/market value at Rs.

1,000/- per square yard, the original landowners shall not be entitled to

the compensation at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard.

4.1 It is submitted that by the impugned common judgment and order,

the High Court has considered the sale deeds relied upon by the State

as well as the sale deeds relied upon by the landowners and thereafter

7 has come to the conclusion that the landowners have failed to produce

any convincing evidence to prove that the award passed by the Land

Acquisition Collector was erroneous. It is submitted that therefore no

error has been committed by the High Court in allowing the appeals

preferred by the State and in upholding the two different awards passed

by the Land Acquisition Collector.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length

and considering the facts and circumstances narrated hereinabove, we

are of the firm opinion that the landowners shall be entitled to the

compensation considering the market value of the acquired land at least

at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard as per the earlier judgment and order

dated 31.05.2014 passed by the Reference Court. It is required to be

noted and it is not in dispute that so far as the State Government is

concerned, the State did not challenge the common judgment and order

dated 31.05.2014 passed by the Reference Court assessing the market

value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard and it was the

landowners who preferred appeals before the High Court for

enhancement of the amount of compensation. It is also required to be

noted that non-filing of the appeals by the State against the common

judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 was also taken note of by this

Court while disposing of the appeals vide common judgment and order

dated 16.05.2018.

8

6. Even otherwise, on a fair reading of the judgment and order dated

16.05.2018 passed by this Court and the subsequent order dated

28.08.2019 passed by the High Court, the matter was remanded to the

Reference Court to consider the sale deeds for the purpose of

enhancement of the amount of compensation, while considering the sale

deeds relied upon by the landowners. In any case, once the judgment

and order passed by the Reference Court dated 31.05.2014 determining

the compensation at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard attained finality so far

as the State is concerned, the landowners shall be entitled to the

compensation at least at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard.

7. Now so far as the submission on behalf of the original landowners

to enhance the amount of compensation beyond Rs. 1,000/- per square

yard is concerned, we have gone through and considered the sale

deeds relied upon on behalf of the landowners. Most of the sale deeds

relied upon by the landowners are much prior to the date of Section 4

notification (ranging between 1992 to 1994). Some of the sale deeds

are post Section 4 notification. Only three to four sale deeds are nearer

to Section 4 notification. However, all those sale deeds are with respect

to small area of lands and even the price is also at variance. Therefore,

it is not safe to determine the compensation relying upon those sale

deeds which are nearer to Section 4 notification.

9

8. In view of the above and for the reasons state above, we are of the

firm opinion that the claimants/landowners shall be entitled to

compensation of the acquired land at least at Rs. 1,000/- per square

yard. It is reported that the State has already deposited/paid the

compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per square yard which is now

sought to be recovered pursuant to the impugned common judgment

and order passed by the High Court restoring the awards passed by the

Land Acquisition Collector determining the compensation/market value

ranging from Rs. 166/- per square yard to Rs. 200/- per square yard.

9. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all these

appeals succeed in part. The impugned common judgment and order

dated 4.3.2022 restoring the awards passed by the Land Acquisition

Collector dated 3.8.2007 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is held that

the original landowners/claimants shall be entitled to the compensation

considering the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,000/- per

square yard.

10. All these appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs.

……………………………………..J. [M.R. SHAH]

NEW DELHI; ……………………………………..J. OCTOBER 17, 2022. [C.T. RAVIKUMAR]

10