Mahinder Narain, J. (Oral) - The appellant P.N. Singh, seeks enhancement of the compensation paid to him for acquisition of his land bearing khasra Nos. 60/10 and 61/15, in all measuring 14 bighas 4 biswas. The land was notified for acquisition by notification issued under Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), dated 21.11.1978. In the notice of acquisition, the purpose of acquisition was stated to be "for manufacture of bricks".

2. By this notification, an area of 666 bighas and 12 biswas was acquired. We find it extremely strange that emergency provision of acquisition of land contained in Section 17 of the Act were involved for acquisition for the purpose of establishment of brick kiln, and that too for over an area of 666 bighas 12 biswas. As far as the land of the appellant is concerned, no part of it, even to date, seems to have been put to use for the purpose it was acquired, in spite of almost 20 years having gone by since the notification for acquisition.

3. During the course of hearing of this appeal, we wanted the land to be identified, and we thought it convenient to direct the parties to identify the land and photograph it, so that we know how the land lay.

4. The photographs have been filed pursuant to our orders, and we find from the photographs which have been produced before us, which both the parties accept as correct representation of the site as it is today, that the land is mostly level land. It appears to have no deep pits, and it seems to be devoid of any rocks.

5. The land being level land, devoid of any rocky out crops, or pits, is eminently suitable as a building site.

6. In fact, it has been urged before us that after the acquisition of the land in 1978, residential colonies like Vasant Kunj, have come up close to this area. Not only that, it is not disputed by the respondent that close to the land in question "farm houses" have come into being after having been developed as such.

7. On the basis of the photographs produced before us, which show the level ground, we are satisfied that the land has potential for building site, and indeed it is suitable for any purpose for which anybody chooses to put such level land.

8. In view of the pressure of population growth of Delhi, and need for eco- friendly open spaces, to our mind, building a brick kiln on this land, would be an utter waste.

9. The appellant before us, has not challenged the notification dated 21.11.1978, issued under Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Act on any ground. The appellant, it appears, would be quite satisfied to get an enhancement in the amount which has been paid to him for acquisition of his land.

10. The Collector vide his award dated 9.4.1980, awarded Rs. 2890/- per bigha as the market value of the land on the date of the notification. Aggrieved by the said order, determining the market value at Rs. 2890/- per bigha, the appellant preferred a reference under Section 18 of the Act. By the judgment dated 24.11.1987, the learned Additional District Judge was pleased to award compensation at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per bigha.

11. Not satisfied with the determination of the market value at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per bigha, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

12. Looking at the photographs which have been produced before us, and the revenue map of village Mehrauli, which has been shown to us, it appears that the land of the appellant abuts on a road. It may be that the road on which the land of the appellant abuts, was not a metalled road at the time of acquisition of the land, but today, as is clear from the photographs, (and it is not disputed by the respondent that the road on which the land of the appellant abuts), is a metalled road.

13. The land in question is in the revenue estate of Mehrauli. The entirety of the land in village Mehrauli, was urbanised by notification No. RNA/526 dated 23.5.1963. In view of this notification, it cannot be contended that any part of the land in village Mehrauli is rural land. The entirety of the land having been urbanised by the said notification, which is prior in point of time to acquisition notification dated 21.11.1978, the land (comprised in) Mehrauli could have been used as a building site, and its potentiality has to be taken into account with that in mind.

14. One of the judgments which have been relied upon by the counsel for the appellant in support of the claim for enhancement, is a judgment given with respect to the land in village Mehrauli, which judgment was exhibited as Ex.A.5. This land was located near Qutab Minar on Delhi-Mehrauli Road, and was part of the abadi (residential area) of the village Mehrauli. In that case the Additional District Judge had given compensation for the said land at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per bigha. Dewan Chand, the owner of the land, aggrieved by the determination of the market value of his land by the Additional District Judge, preferred an appeal to this Court, being R.F.A. No. 174 of 1979, which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court (D.P. Wadhwa & Dalveer Bhandari, JJ.) on 12.8.1991. The Court enhanced the market value determination from Rs. 15,000/- per bigha to Rs. 35,000/- per bigha.

15. It is the contention of Mr. B.P. Gupta who appears for the appellant that the position of the land in the abadi of Mehrauli, and the position of the land of the appellant is similar, inasmuch as the acquisition of Dewan Chands land, and acquisition of the appellants land was separated by 11 years, and in the course of 11 years, owing to large scale developments and urbanisation which had taken place in Delhi, the position of the appellants land be treated at par with the position of the land in Dewan Chands case. The contention of Mr. Gupta finds support from the fact that the Vasant Kunj development is approximately 2000 yards away from the appellants land, which means it is within 2 miles of the land of the appellant. In the year 1967, Mehrauli village was in the nature of a village development, whereas Vasant Kunj, as soon as it was occupied, it was in the nature planned extension of the city of Delhi by the Delhi Development Authority, and forms very much a part of greater Delhi.

16. In any case, the we find that 11 years which separated the notification in Dewan Chands case (which notification was dated 27.3.1967), and the notification in the instant case, which is dated 21.11.1978, the situation of unbuilt areas in Delhi has very materially changed.

17. The appellant in this case, has not claimed Rs. 35,000/- per bigha as the market value of the land in Dewan Chands case, being R.F.A. No. 174 of 1979, decided on 12.8.1991. In this case, as the appellant has confined his claim to Rs. 20,000/- per bigha, we find that the same is reasonable claim, and we fix the market value of the appellants land accordingly at Rs. 20,000/- per bigha.

18. The appellant will be accordingly entitled to be paid at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per bigha for the entirety of his land. In addition to the market value, the appellant will be entitled to solatium at the rate of 30% on the market value determined by us. The appellant will also be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum of the first year after possession of the land was taken, and thereafter for subsequent years, at the rate of 15% per annum on the enhanced amount till the date of payment.