http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  3343-3554 of 1999

PETITIONER: Union of India                                                   

RESPONDENT: Harinder Pal Singh & Ors.                                

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26/10/2005

BENCH: Ashok Bhan & Altamas Kabir

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T WITH

CA NOS.2640-2642/99, 3309 -3340/99, 3341-3342/99, 3555/99, 3556 -3586/99, 5163/02, 3009 -17/03, 3057-3059/03, 3152-80/03 AND 3060 -3061/03

ALTAMAS KABIR,J.         Applications for substitution in Civil Appeal Nos. 3010/03,3152- 80/03  and in 3343-3554/99 are allowed.         All these appeals relate to the acquisition  of  3512.33 acres of  land comprised  in five villages, namely, Hamidpur, Gumanpura,  Khurmania, Kathania  and Wadala Bhitewad  pursuant to several   notifications dated 1st June, 1977, 22nd July, 1977, and 5th May, 1978,   issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter  referred to as ’the  Act’) for extension of the Cantonment at Amritsar.   The   Collector  passed his award in respect of the acquired lands on  28.3.1978 after classifying the lands in question into four categories  namely: (i)     Chahi; (ii)    Nehri; (iii)       Barani; (iv)        Gair Mumkin.

In respect of  each of the categories, different rates of compensation   per acre were computed in the manner following: (i)     Chahi   -  Rs.16,500/-   (ii)    Nehri   -  Rs.16,500/- (iii)   Barani  -  Rs. 12,000/- (iv)    Gair Mumkin  - Rs.5,000/-           Various references  were thereafter made to the District Court at the  request of  the  aggrieved  claimants against the said award of the Land  Acquisition Collector for enhanced compensation in respect of the  acquired  lands at different rates between Rs.50,000/- to Rs.90,000/-   per acre.   Following the belting method, the learned Additional District  Judge, Amritsar, fixed the market value of lands forming part of the   first belt at  a uniform  rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre, irrespective of  the  quality of the lands.  Similarly, in respect of the  second belt, the  market value of the lands was fixed at Rs.40,000/- per acre,  irrespective of the  quality of the lands.  In respect of the those  claimants whose lands did not fall within   the two belts, the  compensation was enhanced and fixed at   

(i)     Rs. 25,000/- per acre for Chahi-Nehri lands  (ii)        Rs.18,000/-  per acre for Barani lands and (iii)       Rs. 8000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin lands.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

A batch of appeals  was filed against the decision of the Additional  District Judge, Amritsar.  In the R.F.As  involving  721.3837 acres in  Hamidpur, after  taking into account the potentiality and the nature  of  the lands, including their proximity to G.T. Road and other connecting  roads and the other sale deeds filed before him, the learned single  Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court fixed the market value of   the  lands in question at a uniform rate of  Rs.16,500/- per acre.  The  same rate was fixed for the lands in Ghumanpura.  LPAs were filed   against the order of the learned single Judge in respect of  village   Hamidpur and Ghumanpura.  The other RFAs in respect of the lands  comprised in village Kathania and  Wadala Bhitewad were pending  consideration when the LPAs were taken up for consideration by the  Division Bench.      Considering the fact  that the appeals  all related to  more or less simultaneous acquisition of the lands  comprised   in the  five villages for extension of the Amritsar Cantonment, the Division  Bench  took up the RFAs for consideration along with the LPAs and   disposed of all the matters by its findings and judgment in the leading  case being LPA No.729/85.         While considering the matter, the Division Bench concluded that  the lands comprised in the five villages were more or less of similar  nature and character and well connected by roads  and that there was a  good deal of potentiality  for development of the locality.  It  was  observed that the areas in question  contained houses and factories and   were also close to the Guru Nanak Dev University.  The Division Bench  also took particular note of the fact that the lands comprised  in the  adjoining village of Kala Ghanu  Pur,  which  had also  been acquired,  under  notifications dated  1st June, 1977 and  10th June, 1977,   were  valued uniformly at Rs.40,000/- per acre.  The Division Bench observed   that  the market value of the acquired lands was being determined  keeping in view their potentiality for  industrialization or urbanization.   It was observed further that it had been  fairly conceded by counsel for   the parties that the market value of the nehri lands in the same locality  is  the same irrespective  of whether they  were nearer or  farther  away  from the town.   On such  consideration, the Division Bench in keeping   with the  market value of the lands comprised in  village Kala Ghanu  Pur, was of the view that the market value of the  lands  under  acquisition in the five villages should  also  be  fixed at  a uniform rate  of Rs.40,000/- per acre, irrespective of  their nature or quality and  whether the same was situated  nearer to the road or at some distance   therefrom.         In keeping with the aforesaid determination, the awards passed  by the learned Reference Court were all modified to the extent that the  claimants of the five villages  would be entitled to compensation at the  rate of Rs.40,000/-, per acre irrespective of the nature of the land.  The  claimants  would also be entitled to statutory interest and solatium at  the rate of 30 per cent.  In particular, the claimants of village Kathania  and Wadala Bhitewad would also  be entitled to the benefit of Section 23  (1-A) of the Act. As indicated hereinbefore,  by virtue of   the  said  judgment  delivered in  LPA No.729/85, the Division Bench disposed of all the  pending appeals, including the RFAs  concerning the lands comprised in  Kathania and Wadala Bhitewad.         All these appeals  have  been preferred by the Union of India  against the said judgment  and order of the Division Bench of the  High  Court of Punjab and Haryana.

Appearing in support of the appeals, Mr. R. Mohan, learned  Additional Solicitor General, firstly  urged that the  Division Bench of the  Punjab and Haryana High Court  had erred in  abandoning the  belting  system and taking  recourse to a uniform rate  for all the lands  comprised in the five different villages on account of  the fact that all  the lands were not similar in nature and did not enjoy  the same  privileges. It was also contended by Mr. Mohan that the market value of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

lands comprised in village Kala Ghanu Pur had been wrongly taken  as a  yardstick for the lands involving  in the instant  appeals on account of  the fact that the lands comprised in village Kala Ghanu Pur and those in   the five villages involved in the instant acquisition  proceedings could  not be taken  to be  comparable units.  According to Mr. Mohan, while  village Kala Ghanu Pur was situated on the road between G.T. Road and   the bye pass road, the situation  of the lands comprised  in the other  villages was not similar and they did not enjoy  the same advantages.    Furthermore, village  Kala Ghanu Pur was closer to Amritsar and was  in  the immediate vicinity  of  Guru Nanak Dev University and the Khalsa  College at Amritsar whereas Hamidpur and Kathania were situated at  some distance away from the city  and  the main roads.

Mr. Mohan lastly contended that the lands comprised in village   Kala Ghanu Pur were too little to  be used as a comparative unit in  respect of  a larger area of land  which had been acquired having   particular regard     to their location as well as potentiality  for  development.  In support of the said submission, Mr. Mohan  firstly  relied on a decision of this Court in the case of Union of India  & Anr. Vs.  Ram Phool & Anr, (2003) 10 SCC 167 wherein the aforesaid principle  was noticed and it was observed that it had been held  in a  catena   of  decisions of this Court that the sale price in respect of a small bit of  transaction would not be the determinative factor for deciding the  market value  of a vast stretch of land. Reference was also made to another decision of this Court in  the  case of  Ranvir Singh & Anr. Vs.  Union of India., 2005 (7) Scale  238    in which  the decision in Ram Phool’s case (supra) was  noticed.         Mr. Mohan urged that having regard to the aforesaid principle, the  impugned decision of  the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana  High Court was  not  capable of being sustained and in the absence  of  any proper comparable unit the decision of the learned single Judge was   liable to be restored.         Appearing in support of the claimants, Mr. P.C. Jain, senior  advocate, on the other hand, contended that the decision of the Division  Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court  impugned in these appeals  was just and based on the materials available,  namely, the  rate of  compensation  fixed  in  respect of the  lands comprising village Kala  Ghanu Pura which were adjacent to the lands comprising the five villages  forming the subject matter of the present appeals.  Mr. Jain contended  that  from the inspection reports it would be amply clear that all the lands  involved in the acquisition proceedings  had similar potential for  commercial exploitation and could be consolidated into a single unit  where the process of development and improvement had already  commenced.  Mr. Jain pointed out that there were several mills and  factories along with residential accommodation which had come up in the  area and there was  little to  differentiate  between the lands comprised  in either village Kathania  or  village Hamidpura and those comprised in  the adjacent  village of Kala Ghanu Pur they were  equally well connected  by arterial roads.   It was urged that since there was little  to differentiate  between the lands comprised in village Kala Ghanu Pur and those  involved in the present  acquisition proceedings, the judgments referred  to  and relied upon by Mr. Mohan would be of  little or no relevance.  It  was urged that, in any event, the lands comprised in  village Kala Ghanu  Pur could not be said to be a small unit since it comprised an area of  208.2625 acres.          Mr.Jain  contended that the appeals were  misconceived  and were  liable to be dismissed.             We have carefully considered the submissions made on behalf  of  the respective parties  and we see no justification to interfere with the  decision of the Division Bench of the  Punjab and Haryana High Court  which, in our view, took a  pragmatic approach in fixing the market  value of the lands forming  the subject matter of the  acquisition  proceedings at a uniform rate.  From the  sketch plan of the area in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

question, it appears  to us that while  the lands in question are  situated  in five different villages, they can be consolidated into one single unit  with little to choose between one stretch of land and another.  The  entire area  is in a  stage of development   and the different villages are  capable of being developed in the same manner as the lands comprised  in  Kala Ghanu Pur where  the market value of  the acquired lands was  fixed at a uniform rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre.  The Division Bench of  the Punjab and Haryana High Court  discarded the  belting method of  valuation  having regard to the local circumstances  and features and   no cogent ground has been made out to interfere with the same.         In our view, in the absence of any contemporaneous document,  the market value   of  the acquired lands of village Kala Ghanu Pur   which were acquired  at the same time  as the lands in the other five  villages was correctly taken to be a comparative unit  for determination  of the market value of the lands comprising the lands forming the  subject matter of the  acquisition proceedings under consideration.  No  interference is, therefore, called for in these appeals and they are all  dismissed without any order as to costs.         Although, it has been duly mentioned in  the judgment under  appeal, we reiterate that as far as the benefits under Section 23 (1-A)  of the Act  are concerned, the same will be confined to  the lands  comprised in village Kathania  and Wadala Bhitewad only where the  Collector made his award after 30th April, 1982.