Harish Vats & Ors v. Union of India & Ors

ORDER %

08.07.2011 For orders, see LA.APP.No. 784/2005. PRADEEP NANDRAJOGJ. JULY 08, 2011 mm Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. I + LAAPP 58I2009, LAAPP 603/2009, LAAPP 6042009, LA APP 6O612O9 LA APP 610/2009, 74/2010, LA APP 78/2010, I - Page ibf LA.PP.784/2OO5& connected . ..: • ,: : . .. • :. • . .. . : • • • ' .• r • H' LAAPP 7912010, LAAPP 121/2O1O 2Qq APP 125/2010, LAAPP 164/2010, QAPP i852OiOLAAPP : 186/2010, LA APP 200/2010, LA APP 238/2010, LA AP 239/2010 LAAPP 243/2010, LAAPP 244/2O1O LAAPP 245/2010, LAAPP 247/2010, LAAPP 251/2010, LAAPP 252/2010, LAAPP 266/2010, LAAPF 267/2010, LAAPP 273/2010, LAAPP 274I2O1O, LAAPP 275/2O1O LAAPP ' 312/2010, LAAPP 324/2010, LA APP 326/2010, ILAAPP , 327/2010 LAAPP 320010, LAAPP 330/2010( LAAPP 331/2010, LAAPP 332/2010, LAAPP 333/2010 withiOM APPL No 5524/2011, LAAPP 335/2010, LAAPP 367/201b, LAAPP 368/2010, LAAPP 369/2010, LAAPP 371/2010 & i CM APPL No20099/2010, LAAPP 374/2010, LAAPP 375/2O1O,tLAAPP 377/2010, LAAPP 379/20101 LAAPP 423/2010ç LAAPP 452/2010, LAAPP 461/2010, LAAPP 472/2010c LAAIP 694/2010, LA APP 696(2010 & CM APPL No 6340/20]!1; LA APP % 697/2010, LAAPP 698/2010 & CM APPL 1734/2011,LAAPP 76/2O1O & CM APPL 17215/O1O, LAAPI 7O7/2O1O,LAAPP 708/2010, LAAPP 709/2010, LAAPP 710/2010 wthM APPL No 2568/2011, LA APP 713/2010 with CM APPL No4i73/2O1O, A , LAAPP 715/2010, LAAPP 71712010, LAAPP 719/2OiO, LAAPP F 766/2010, LAAPP 796/2010, LAAPP 797/2O1O,, 'LAAPP At 798/O1O, LAAPP 799/2010, LAAPP 818/2O1O, LAAPP 819/2010, LAAPP 829/2010, LAAPP 831/2010 &cFVi APPL 955/2011, LAAPP 832/2010, LAAPP 833/2010 & GM APPL 6392/2011, LAAPP 834/2010, LAAPP 842/201A0, LAAPP 871/2010, LAAPP 874/2010, LAAPP 875/2010, LAAPP 876/2010, LAAPP 877/2010, LAAPP 878/2O1, 'LAAPP " 879/2010, LAAPP 880/2010, LAAPP 881/2010 & CM APPL65O5/2011, LAAPP 88212010, LAAPP 383I2010 LAAPP A . 884/2010, - . -• . .., -• LAAPP 886/2010, LAAPP 888/2010, ' ... -' •. LAAPP r 889/201O & CM APPL 2249/2011, LA PP 890/201b, LA APP 893/2010 & CM APPL 6750/2011, LA APP 894/2d1) & cM No23353/2010, LAAPP 895/2010, LAAPP 896/20A1b,1LAAPP 897/2010 & CM APPL728/2011, LAAPP 903/2010, LAAPP LA40P784/2005&connected A Page2Q19 A A A rA A A A A A A A A A A A A I A A j A A t I iF * : •• •• - . • . :: • •. • •' •'. ' , -: ..••• : .• j.. ; . • •. , .:; -•- Vv , 9O7J2O1O, tAAPPt 938/2O1O, LAAPP 939/20104 LAAPP ' I : 1O31/2O1O & CM APPL 3c186J2011, LAAPP 1040/21 APPIL 56731201L LAAPP 1OL11/2O1O,; LAAPP iOi3/2OLO LA PP 1045/2010, LA APP 1O4/2O1O, LA 1PP 1O8/2O1O, I LAAPP 1049/2010, LAAPP 1050/2010, LAAPP iO6/20101 LAAPP 1060/2010, LAAPP 1061/2010. LAAPP 107112010, LA APP 1252O11, LA IPP 126/2011, 1A APP 258/2011' , s (Relating to Notification u/s 4 dated 21,0 3 2003 & Award No 3/2005-06, ViIIage-I1undka) AND L + LAAPP 600/2009, LAAPP 605/2009, LAAPP 615/2OO9, LAAPP 310/2010, LAAPP 325/2010, LAAPP 376/2O1Oj'LA APP ¶ 383/2010, LAAPP 84/2O1O, LAAPP 385/2010, LAAPP , 473/2010, LA APP 492/2010, LA APP 586/2010, LA APP 591/2010, LAAPP 638/2010, LAAPP 690/2010, 'LAAPP w 692/2010, LAAPP 711/2010, LAAPP, 716/2010, 'LAAPP 763/2010, LAAPP 872/2010, LAAPP 873/2010, J.AAPP 885/2010, LAAPP 887/2010, LAAPP 891/2O1O, LAAPP 892/2010, LAAPP 898/2010, LAAPP 906/2010 &itl APPL No4443/2010, LAAPP 937/2010 & CM APPL 23299/2010, ? LA APP 1042/2010, LA APP 1047/2010 , : (Relating to Notification U/S 4 dated 21 03 20O3 Award No 1/2005-06, Village-Mundka) ' I .' g . .... .. ... . ....... .., ; ...., . .. :. . f,., AND , ; . .. . . . . . ,., ... . .,. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . : . •• .I• ' . . . . LA APP 1003/2010, LA APP 1O17/2O10, AAPP 1p1/2o1o, . • • ' ; • :. • LAAPP 1022/2010, LA APP 1023/2010, LA APP lOi4/2OlO, LAAPP 1051/2010, LAAPP 1053/2010, LAAPP 1054/2010 & ICM' APPL No 5656/2011, LA APP 1p55/201O) AAPP 1057/2010, LA APP 1O58/2010, LA APP / 1O59/010, LA APP 1068/2010, LAAPP ]069/2010 1 LAAPP 124/2011, LAAPP 127/2011 LA APP 128/2011, LA APP 259/2011 LA APP 784/2005 & connected I, I I I • • . • •.- (ReIatng to Nofication u/s 4 dated 17 06 2005 & Award f No13/2006-07, ViiIage-Mundk) 4 , AND •; ••• •.. ' ..: ••.• .•• •.. .• , :'• ••. • •• • : •'• ••• •:•:•.••.;••• + LAAPP 40/2009 & Cross Objections, LAAPP I 4bI2OO9, I LAAPP 42812009, 442/2009, LAAPP 611/2009,j 4LAAPP 616I2009, LAAPP27/2O1O (Relating to Notification u/s 4 dated 4 09 2OO Award Na 3/2004-05, ViHage-Bakkarwaa) I AND I • •• :.: • H. : 4 :; :: • • ••(••• • .;••:•• : :'• : !S: . LA'APP 1029/2010 & CM No5948/2011, J:LAAPP lI 1030/2010, LAAPP 1031/2010, LAAPP 1O33/2O1O& CM 6645/2011, LA APP 1062/2010, 1063/2010 & dM ; No 6943/2011, LA APP 1064/2010, LA APP 1066/2010, 7LA APP 106712010, LA APP 11/2011, LA APP 122 /2 011 (Relating, to Notification u/s 4 dated 17 06 2OO5 Award 4No 1/2006 707, ViIIage-BakkarivaIa) CORAM HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG

I h9 1 Whether the Reporters oflocalpapers may be aII9\ed t toseethejudgm1ent t i ' 2 -rio be referred to Reporter or rot 7 4 3 Whether the judgment shoulld be reported in the Digt 44 I • • • • • • • • • • •.. I '1 I • ;i • . • tk .PRACEEP NANDRA.JOG, L

(Oral) •. • : • • • • • I am deciding the above captioned apeIals and reItabIe civil miscellajieous applications which :are y was' pf cross objections, all ofwhich have been iisted hereinabe • • • •.• • 4 .. • H i LAAPP784/2005&connected Pae4bf19 I I • . •: ••• • • • •. I • • • • • • 4) •• 4)44 •1 • •.• • • • I • •. •• ••• :...•.: H •: •• • • • ••• ••H - I I I II I • •2 • • • . ' • •1 • 'I. 1 • • • . $ : : I T the price fr one year @ 11 5% per annum This prc wa k adopted fo category A lands Forlands in cateory B) a d te vaIu was further discounted by 9O,OOO/- per acre Pertairiing t the . . .. .t .., . . . .. . . . : • • ' . • . , ; . . . . j . notiations dated 21 3 2cO3 a fic nd 24 9 2003, v, : . • • he Land Acquisition Collector relied upon the notification I the fixing minimum pric of agricultural land as of 1 4 2001 and gave no benefit of enhancement with reference to the fact tht!ithe fair • market value of the lands to be determined was as of 2f 3 2003 and Z4 9 2003 Even pertaining to the notificato dated * 17 6 2005 which required fair market value of land to be idetermined in the revenue estate of village Bakkwala and village Mundka as of 17 6 2005, the Land Acquisition collector fletermined the same with reference to the notifica1ion t fixing mum value of agricultural lands in Delhi as of 1 4 2b1 and : gave no increase Aggrieved by the determination of the fair j market . .. . ' .. . ,: 'I : . • .. ., , . , . . .. . . c. , • • • . .. ;..... value of , the lands by the Land Acquisition Collector the '4 , . ... ., .. land . ... owners sought a reference under Section 18 of r ' Land Acquisition Act 1894 and on the refretce being made, hp vide j yarious judgments and decr'ees, which are under chllnge ir 1 the above captioned appeals, the Reference Court Il took corçective action, as per the view pf the Referepce Court, and nhanced the fair market value I In a nut shell, pertaining to the notification dated ¶ 25 2 1997 vide which agricultural lands i village Muna were açquired, the Reference Court adopted the same notiftcajon as as adoptedby , the Land Acquisition Collector under hicb the LA APP 784/2005 & connectec Page7 of19 •l. . .. ., ................ 1 ....... . .; . . .,•• : . . : •:•. .,,.. .4 £ . . ,., ... .4.,.. . I P4 & Ix ii I know bout pemding acquisition inasmucii as before ac'quisitions are made, land in the area is surveyed Without a survey it would be difficult to issue even the notification underSdtion LA.PPi84/2OO5 & connected Paed'f 19 • - - • • •, t f Reference Court pertaining to sale deeds, dated 6 1 1995,

0.5.1997, 4.6:1997 and 8.9.1997 relied upon bi. UOl vould. 5,how the actual market value bf the !and and thus ieaned counsel would urge that 1the said four sale deeds shôul be considered, but hastens to add, tat: since value reflcted therein is less than th rniirnum ;price notified byJ:'te dov'ernment, the pnce fixetion should be with reference td the ninirrnim price notified b the Government' Which is neest to the point of tirn when the respective, notifications Vwere isued u1id,er,Section 4 of the Land Accuisition Act. • : •. • - .

20., V An independent and alternaive argument is also, V avanced by learned counsel or the Union. The sani rest itself on a decision of a Division Bench of this Court repoed rt as • V 2006 (135) DLT 231 /aiS/ngh Vs. gOt • V The decision in Jai 5,ngh's cse (supra) co?icers itself With the determination of the faft market value of land in vijiage V Bkkarwala which were acquired ursuant.• to a noifi 1ction V 3 . • dated 15.10.1993 at U,32,000/ - per •bigha. Learied cotSrbsel • V would urge that the said decision has attained finality inasnuch V V •V V LA3.APP.784/2005 & connected V Pge 12 of V V •V V VV . • V• V ' V. € 1€, V . • € ,V 3 V V • 3 V •€S •€ V 3 V • • • € V J . . . . c ,•. •. ... ... . ! t aquired an thus, it is not uncommon, for perspflS to 9urchse rpalI parcels of lands in areas where cquisitiOfl arelitely to take pla, these transaiOnS ar speculative and cat n ot be be a representatiVe measure of the fair rriarket value of tken'to , /land as on the date of fhe sale Further, the princples '3 1j &f rtio ; and proportion. as also the principles of averaeS arpd the rinciples of smpling e1l me that to be representtie ofthe, v(holp, a smple must bear 1at intelligible proportifl to fhe whole Thus, not for the reasoning advanced by th larned but for the twin reasoninghither0f0 doted,! ; Reference Court, I, hold that Ex PfL cannot be good evidence wherefrom friarke't value of , the land could be determined There is antadditiOflahl I % reason not to rely upon the said sale deed The sale deds 1 toEx R-4, dated 6 1 1995, 30 5 1997, 4 6 1997 and 1% 89 1997 t arelalso pertaining to Village Mund 1ka and reflet asa price v. lower than the sIe price recorded n Ex P-i 1 ih IUCh fct, he : Il I I Sa'le ,, price. in:the. said . .5e,d.e.edSaVe'ageS, :rnuch:1 ,I esth II .an. .• f '. I' even the minimum price for agricultural land in Delhi rofied by t the Government

23 1 1 Thus, the fair market v 1lue of the lnds1 w1Uld be ', I 1 reqnred to be fixed either with reference to the decisior of this I I ( I ' Court in J5ing/ case (supra) or Pratay 5inghcaSé (sbpra) I l I highlight that both dcisioflS, penned, by th IDivislon S Bench of this Court have been uphld by he Supreme Curt The decision in k' Stngh's case (supra) dtrmned fair market value of land in Village IBakkarwala in I 'sum of I per bigha as of 15 10 1993, and theperusaltthereOf LA APP 784/2005 &connected Page 1 of 19 I I 1% I I - I wduld show that the Court assessed the ar, 66rkç wfth reference to sale deeds executed between the ya i990 till p ;t :t the year 1996 either in Village Tikri lalan p Villa4 lv1undka, pparently on the premise that being contiguous vilIaes,sale I price of agricultural land in the 2 adjoining villages would be . indicative of fair market value of land in Village Bakkarwála • - . . . . J '1' . . . • . ' :. . . • . . . •. : •. . . D I 1t :. In tPrataj S/ngh's.case: (s.upra) the Division . . . t . •. . + •Bench . t was concerned with aghcultural lands inTikri Kalan and J another . . ••• • • . •• '. . : . • • . . . : . :. ., . I .:adJOiflIflgi. Vi.lIagenamed .Ghevra ;and, pert.lnng.:tO . .. . i- . i . a:r.ous:.,4 y • ;. • ;4 notifications issued under Section 4 of th Land Acquisition Act I I I ietermined the fair market value of agricultwral lands iri Village I iikri Kalan and Ghevra as under - ' r i. 'II .. .••:. . :; • •'• •'' ,. : ,'•i:__._ ___i: • •i . •: S NO ' Date Village I P4e__per__B)ga

i: 24 07 1995 & Tikri Kalan Block 16 11 1995 5,16b(1 fr P 1,73,5OO/- for BIckBland ' 2 ii 06 1996 Tikri Kalan & ,35,815/. f r, Block ; S f Ghevra A & 1,9O, 1I56/ for t BlockB làhd 17 12 2002 Tikri Kalan , 4,O2,85O/- I f8r Block c A & 3,24 850/- for I BlockBland ____ ,i . . ? Fqllowipg thejudg.rnent in Prataj___Singhscase1(supra) i I ., land I have decided the fair market value for the itdated in k I revenue estate of Village Ghevra, which was acquired rJrsuant to notification dated 6.2 2003 in the batch of appeals ig Land LA APP 784/2005 & connected 4 Page 15 bf 19 I '4

¶1'4 I I I I ft '4 I '4 '4

. $-29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LA.APP.185/2010 HARISH VATS & ORS. ApeIIants Through: Mr.L.B.Rai,Advocate versus I UNION OF INDIA& ORS. Respofldents Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocatç for R-1 1k S CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG