The State Of Haryana vs Subhash Chander

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 859­899 OF 2023 (@SLP (C) Nos. 13992­14032 of 2020)

State of Haryana & Anr. ...Appellant(s) Versus Subhash Chander & Ors. …Respondent(s)

With CIVIL APPEAL NO. 900 OF 2023 (@SLP (C) No. 2971 of 2023) (@D. No. 12754 of 2020)

JUDGMENT

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned

common judgment and order dated 18.10.2019 passed by

the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in

Regular First Appeal (RFA) No. 1100/2013 and other allied

first appeals, by which, the High Court has allowed the

said first appeals in part preferred by the original land

owners and has enhanced the amount of compensation for Signature Not Verified

the lands acquired at Rs. 2,98,54,720/­ per acre with all Digitally signed by R Natarajan Date: 2023.02.10 16:41:47 IST Reason: 1 other statutory benefits, the State of Haryana has

preferred the present appeals.

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

as under: ­ 2.1 That approximately 58 acres of large chunk of lands

situated at village Kherki, Majra came to be acquired for

the public purpose under the provisions of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894. The land acquisition officer declared

the awards. At the instance of the original land owners,

references under Section 18 of the Act, 1894 were made.

The reference court enhanced the compensation for

notification dated 13.01.2010 to Rs. 1,56,24,000/­ per

acre from Rs. 60 lakhs per acre as awarded by the land

acquisition officer. The appeals preferred by the State

against the judgment and award passed by the reference

court determining the compensation at Rs. 1,56,24,000/­

came to be dismissed. However, by the impugned

judgment and order taking into consideration the amount

of compensation enhanced by the High Court which came

to be modified by this Court to Rs. 2,38,00,000/­ per acre

with respect to the lands acquired in the month of

January, 2008 and granting 12% cumulative increase, the

2 High Court has partly allowed the appeals preferred by the

land owners and determined and awarded the

compensation at Rs. 2,98,54,720/­ per acre.

2.2 Dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed

by the High Court determining and awarding the

compensation for the lands acquired vide notification

dated 13.01.2010 at Rs. 2,98,54,720/­ per acre, the State

of Haryana has preferred the present appeals.

3. We have heard Shri Nikhil Goel, learned AAG, appearing

on behalf of the State of Haryana and learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the respective original land owners.

4. Shri Nikhil Goel, learned AAG, appearing on behalf of the

State has vehemently submitted that while determining

the compensation at Rs. 2,98,54,720/­ per acre for the

lands acquired vide notification dated 13.01.2010, the

High Court has materially erred in taking into

consideration and/or relying upon the judgment of this

Court passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 11814­11864 of 2017

[State of Haryana Vs. Ram Chander (2017 SCC OnLine

SC 1869)] with respect to the lands acquired vide

notification issued in the month of January, 2008. 3 4.1 It is submitted that in the judgment and order passed by

this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 11814­11864 of 2017, this

Court has specifically observed and held that the

determination of compensation vide the said judgment at

Rs. 2,38,00,000/­ per acre shall not be treated as a

precedent in any other case. It is submitted that therefore,

while passing the impugned judgment and order the High

Court has materially erred in taking into consideration the

amount awarded by this Court vide judgment and order

passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 11814­11864 of 2017 at Rs.

2,38,00,000/.

4.2 It is further submitted by Shri Nikhil Goel, learned AAG,

appearing on behalf of the State that in the present case

the prices of the land were decreasing which was taken

note of by this Court.

4.3 It is further submitted that even otherwise considering the

fact that with respect to the very village, lands came to be

acquired from 2008 onwards and therefore, the prices of

the lands were artificially increased. It is submitted that

therefore, the High Court has materially erred in giving

4 12% rise on Rs. 2,38,00,000/­ per acre which has been

awarded for notification dated 25.01.2008.

4.4 Making the above submissions and relying upon the above

decision, it is prayed to allow the present appeals.

5. While opposing the present appeals, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the land owners has submitted that

once the appeals preferred by the State were dismissed

and the impugned common judgment and order was

passed in the appeals preferred by the land owners, it is

not open for the State now to challenge the impugned

common judgment and order passed by the High Court.

5.1 It is further submitted that even otherwise considering the

sale instances produced on record right from 09.03.2007

till 31.03.2008 there was increase in prices and therefore,

the High Court has not committed any error in granting

the enhancement of 12% on Rs. 2,38,00,000/­ per acre. It

is submitted that as such no concrete evidence has been

laid down or no contrary sale instance were placed on

record by the acquiring body showing the decrease in the

market value between 2008 and 2010.

5 5.2 Making the above submissions and relying upon the recent

decision of this Court in the case of Ramrao Shankar

Tapse Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development

Corporation and Ors.; (2022) 7 SCC 563, by which, it

was observed that a cumulative increase of 10 to 15% per

year in the market value of land may be accepted, it is

prayed to dismiss the present appeals.

6. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respective parties at length. We have gone through the

impugned common judgment and order passed by the

High Court and we have also gone through and considered

the earlier decision of this Court in the case of Civil Appeal

Nos. 11814­11864 of 2017 by which with respect to the

lands acquired vide notification dated 25.01.2008, this

Court determined the compensation at Rs. 2,38,00,000/­

per acre. In the said judgment and order, this Court has

specifically observed that the said judgment may not be

treated as a precedent. However, it is required to be noted

that even on merits also, this Court considered and

accepted the sale instances produced on behalf of the land

owners ranging between 2007 and 2008. Therefore, as 6 such determination of the compensation at Rs.

2,38,00,000/­ per acre with respect to the land acquired

vide notification issued on 25.01.2008 can be said to be

the base and considering the time gap between 2008

notification and 2010 notification, a suitable enhancement

ranging between 8% to 15 % is given which is held to be

permissible as per the catena of decisions of this Court

right from the decision in the case of Pehlad Ram Vs.

HUDA; (2014) 14 SCC 778 up to the recent decision of

this Court in the case of Ramrao Shankar Tapase (supra).

However, at the same time considering the fact that in the

present case with respect to the very village, the

acquisition proceedings came to be initiated in the month

of January, 2008, it will not be safe and/or prudent to

grant the cumulative increase of 12%. In the facts and

circumstances of the case and even considering the sale

instances produced on record, we are of the opinion that if

instead of 12% enhancement on Rs. 2,38,00,000/­, 10%

increase is accepted it can be said to be a just

compensation and it may meet the ends of justice. 7

7. In that view of the matter, the market value of the land in

question for the lands acquired vide notification dated

13.01.2010 will be at Rs. 2,87,98,000/­ per acre.

8. Resultantly, the impugned common judgment and order

passed by the High Court is required to be modified to the

aforesaid extent by awarding the compensation at Rs.

2,87,98,000/­ per acre. Present appeals are partly allowed

to the aforesaid extent and it is held that the original land

owners shall be entitled to the compensation at Rs.

2,87,98,000/­ per acre with all other statutory benefits

which may be available under the Land Acquisition Act,

1894. The appellant – State of Haryana is hereby directed

to deposit and/or pay the compensation to the original

land owner(s) at the market value of Rs. 2,87,98,000/­

along with all other statutory benefits within a period of six

weeks from today after deducting whatever amount is

already paid. Present appeals are partly allowed to the

aforesaid extent. No costs.

………………………………….J. [M.R. SHAH]

NEW DELHI; ………………………………….J. FEBRUARY 10, 2023 [C.T. RAVIKUMAR] 8