Arawali Power Company Pvt Ltd v. Joginder Singh Tokash

Arawali Power Company Pvt Ltd v. Joginder Singh Tokash

(Supreme Court Of India)

Civil Appeal No(S). 8757 of 2016 | 05-09-2017

1. Delay condoned.

2. Substitution allowed.

3. Leave granted.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. The appeals and cross appeals have been preferred as against the determination of the compensation made by the High Court.

6. Land acquisition proceedings were initiated by issuing a Notification on 16.01.2007 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short 'the Act') and it was followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 12.04.2007 and Awards were passed on 4.6.2007, 12.7.2007,8.5.2007 and 7.5.2007 determining compensation at the rate of Rs. 16,00,000/- (Rupees sixteen lakhs only) per acre by the Land Acquisition Collector. Reference was sought under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference court did not enhance the amount as the determination made by the land Acquisition Collector was found to be proper. Thereafter appeals were preferred by the claimants as well as by the Arawali Power Company Pvt. Ltd.(in short 'the Company') before the High Court. The High Court had enhanced the compensation. The appeals against order of reference court preferred by the Company were rightly dismissed as the Company questioned determination made by the Land Acquisition Collector. In view of the provisions contained in Section 25 of the Act the compensation awarded by the reference court could not be lower than the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector as such the High Court rightly dismissed the appeal preferred by the Company. However while allowing the appeals filed by the claimants, the High Court had determined the compensation at the rate of Rs. 29,00,400/- (Rupees twenty nine lakhs four hundred only) per acre.

7. Aggrieved thereby the appeals have been preferred by the Company as well as the cross appeals/objections by the owners for the enhancement of compensation.

8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. The High Court has taken into consideration four sale deeds:

(1) Exh. P.4 dated 27.7.2010 by which land admeasuring 43 kanals two marlas was sold at the rate of Rs. 50,44,148/-(Rupees fifty lakhs forty four thousand one hundred and forty eight only) per acre.

(2) Exh. P.5 Sale deed dated 27.7.2010 was also approximately for the same amount;

3. Exh. P6 sale deed dated 29.7.2010 by which land admeasuring 03 kanals 03 marlas were sold for Rs. 19,88,438/- (Rupees ninteen lakhs eighty eight thousand four thirty eight only) i.e. approximately at the rate of Rs. 50,50,000/- per acre.

4. Sale deed Exh. P4(2) dated 16.5.2007 was also taken into consideration by which one Marla was sold for Rs,1,07,500/-(Rupees one lakh seven thousand and five hundred only) i.e. at the rate of Rs. 1,72,00,000/- (Rupees crore seventy two lakh only) per acre.

9. However, the Court has made deduction of 70% from the sale deed P4 dated 16.5.2007 and worked out the price at Rs. 51,20,000/- per acre. However while working out the price as per sale deed dated 27.7.2010 and other sale deed dated 29.7.2010 had applied the deduction of 12% per annum and has come to the valuation in January, 2007 at the rate of Rs. 32,31,200/- (Rupees thirty two lakhs thirty one thousand and two hundred only) per acre and has granted the compensation at the rate of Rs. 29,00,400/- (Rupees twenty nine lakh four hundred only) per acre.

10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that since it was agreed between the parties that the subsequent sale deed were bonafide and could be taken into consideration, we do not propose to disturb the consideration made by the High Court of the sale deeds which were executed in the year 2010 in peculiar facts of the case not to be treated as precedent at all as subsequent sale deeds are to be ignored. However the sale deed (P4) dated 16.5.2007 was of one marla area only. It was a very small area. Obviously it was not for agricultural purpose and must have been sold, considering its area, for residential or for commercial purposes. Thus sale deed dated 16.5.2007 could not have been taken into consideration by the High Court. However, while we take into consideration the sale deed of 2010 applying 12% deduction made by the High Court, further deduction towards development ought to have been made which was not made by the High Court.

11. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we find that it would be appropriate to make approximately 15% deduction towards development and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we grant compensation at the rate of Rs. 25,00,000/-(Rupees twenty five lakhs only) per acre alongwith statutory benefits.

12. Consequently the appeals filed by the Company are partly allowed and the cross appeals/cross objections preferred by the owners are hereby dismissed. No costs.

Civil Appeal Nos.4081-4082 of 2017

Dhanpati & Ors. ... Appellants

Versus

State of Haryana & Ors. ... Respondents

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

13. Delay condoned. Substitution allowed.

14. Considering the order passed today in the batch of cases filed by Arawali Power Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Joginder Singh Tokash & Ors. (C.A.No.8757/2016) and several other appellants, where we have partly allowed the appeals filed by the Arawali Power Company Pvt. Ltd. and the appeals filed by the owners have been dismissed, this appeal by the owners is also dismissed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

Advocate List
Bench
  • HON'BLE JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA
  • HON'BLE JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
Eq Citations
  • 2017 (4) RCR (CIVIL) 577
  • 2018 (1) ALLMR 929
  • (2019) 18 SCC 808
  • LQ/SC/2017/1312
Head Note

A. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Ss. 23, 28 and 29 — Compensation — Enhancement of — Sale deeds — Consideration of — Land acquisition proceedings initiated by issuing a Notification on 16012007 under S. 4 of the Act and it was followed by declaration under S. 6 of the Act on 12042007 and Awards were passed on 462007, 1272007, 852007 and 752007 determining compensation at the rate of Rs 1600000 Rupees sixteen lakhs only per acre by the Land Acquisition Collector — Reference was sought under S. 18 of the Act — Reference court did not enhance the amount as the determination made by the land Acquisition Collector was found to be proper — Thereafter appeals were preferred by the claimants as well as by the Arawali Power Company Pvt Ltd (the Company) before the High Court — High Court had enhanced the compensation — Appeals against order of reference court preferred by the Company were rightly dismissed as the Company questioned determination made by the Land Acquisition Collector — In view of the provisions contained in S. 25 of the Act the compensation awarded by the reference court could not be lower than the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector as such the High Court rightly dismissed the appeal preferred by the Company — However while allowing the appeals filed by the claimants the High Court had determined the compensation at the rate of Rs 2900400 Rupees twenty nine lakhs four hundred only per acre — Aggrieved thereby the appeals have been preferred by the Company as well as the cross appeals/objections by the owners for the enhancement of compensation — High Court had taken into consideration four sale deeds — Sale deed Exh P42 dated 1652007 was also taken into consideration by which one Marla was sold for Rs107500Rupees one lakh seven thousand and five hundred only ie at the rate of Rs 17200000 Rupees crore seventy two lakh only per acre — However the Court had made deduction of 70 from the sale deed P4 dated 1652007 and worked out the price at Rs 5120000 per acre — However while working out the price as per sale deed dated 2772010 and other sale deed dated 2972010 had applied the deduction of 12 per annum and has come to the valuation in January 2007 at the rate of Rs 3231200 Rupees thirty two lakhs thirty one thousand and two hundred only per acre and has granted the compensation at the rate of Rs 2900400 Rupees twenty nine lakh four hundred only per acre — Held, since it was agreed between the parties that the subsequent sale deed were bonafide and could be taken into consideration we do not propose to disturb the consideration made by the High Court of the sale deeds which were executed in the year 2010 in peculiar facts of the case not to be treated as precedent at all as subsequent sale deeds are to be ignored — However the sale deed P4 dated 1652007 was of one marla area only — It was a very small area — Obviously it was not for agricultural purpose and must have been sold considering its area for residential or for commercial purposes — Thus sale deed dated 1652007 could not have been taken into consideration by the High Court — However while we take into consideration the sale deed of 2010 applying 12 deduction made by the High Court further deduction towards development ought to have been made which was not made by the High Court — In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case we find that it would be appropriate to make approximately 15 deduction towards development and in the facts and circumstances of the case we grant compensation at the rate of Rs 2500000Rupees twenty five lakhs only per acre alongwith statutory benefits (Paras 10 and 11)