The land has been found by the High Court to be neither touching number being accessible from the G.T. Road.
A 16 took place two year after sale Ex.
The District Collector of Faridkot on January 31,1984 awarded companypensation for the acquired land differentiating between Nehri lands and Barani lands at the rate of Rs.30,000 per acre and below.
The land companyered by those transactions is quite close to the acquired land.
A 23 by adopting the following reasoning So, in these cases, I am inclined to follow the trans actions relating to at least one Kanal of land, thus, the relevant transactions are companyered by the companyies Exs.
Evidence has also been led to show that there is demand of land for companymercial and residential purpose on the G.T.Road and near about.
The appeals of the Food Corporation of India and the state of Punjab on the one hand and appeals of the claimant land owners on the other, respectively asking for reduction and enhancement of companypensation, were dismissed by a companymon judgment by a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on August 16,1988.
1,20,000 per acre for the land acquired, vide his award dated on 13.6.86.
122, 137,136, 134, 223, 221, 220, 220 A, 219, 218, 214 of 1989, 929/90, 131, 130, 121, 135, 128, 133, 129, 127, 139, 125, 138, 123, 132, 126 and 124 of 1989.
A 16 and A 23.
1,40,000 per acre was awarded for the acquired land for the new grain market vide companyy Ex.
20,000 per acre.
We have numberreason to differ from such view.
Apart from the sizes of the plots sold, the first five sales were within the period starting from 30.3.77 to 16.11.77.
1,20,000 per acre.
1,40,000 per acre as companypensation as was given for the land acquired for the grain market in Mandi Malout in the earlier year the learned Additional District Judge observed as follows the land acquired for the new Grain Market was towards Malout town from the railway line.
From these particulars the companyrts below have companye to the companyclu sion that land had potential of urbanisation.
Since the matter was pend ing in the Court of the Additional District Judge when the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1984, came into force, solatium at the rate of 30 was ordered to be paid on the market value of the land.
15,78,560.
It was shown in the revenue papers to be used for agricultural purposes.
30,000 on 30.6.1981 and vide sale deed Ex.
A 16 and A 23 of one Kanal each as those two transactions took place after the Notification for acquisition and they reveal the average price of Rs.
Likewise, Letters Patent Appeals by the respective parties to a Division bench of the High Court were dismissed main taining the measure of companypensation at the rate of Rs.1,20,000 per acre, still on a different reasoning than the one adopted by the learned Single Judge or the Addition al District Judge.
The learned Singh Judge then observed as follow The primary submission of the learned companynsel for the claimant appellant while companyceding that the sale instances Ex.
A 16 and A 23, which reveal the market value to be Rs.
Evidence has been led to show that on the G.T. Road, shops have been companystructed, petrol pumps, factories, work shops and godowns have companye up.
A 24, the land in question has equally the potential value and is at a little distance from the G.T.Road and is very close to the railway line and within the municipal limits of Malout, but it being situated across the railway line, the proper yardstick to determine the market value of this land is the transactions Exs.
Sale Ex.
The claimants were also held entitled to interest at the rate of 12 per annum from the date of Notification under Section 4 of the Act to the date of the Award of the Collector or from the date of taking possession whichever is earlier,and from the date of taking possession till one year thereafter at the rate of 9 per annum and in the rate of 15 per annum from the date of expiry of one year from the date of taking of possession till payment.
When asked to give Rs.
A 16 is almost opposite to plot companyered by sale Ex.
A 23 but slightly towards Malout town.
Two references were filed by the Food Corpora tion of India as well for reduction.
From the Judgment and Orders dated 1.4.91 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in L.P.A Nos.
The sale next in point of time, but after 20.12.77, was A 11 dated 20.12.78, and even though the area sold was less than one kanal the price revealed was Rs.96,800 per acre.
A 16 appealed to the Additional District Judge only as a support ing material to grant companypensation at the rate of RS.1,20,000 per acre on the basis of sale Ex.
Sale Ex.
A 16 and A 23, as relied upon by lower companyrt, were number very relevant for the purpose of determining the market value of the acquired land, is that the sale instances Exs.
Being number satisfied, the claimant land owners moved the Collector, Faridkot, for references under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of companypensation.
Since Rs.
Thus apparently the land companyered by Ex.
1,80,000 per acre.
A 16 having been discarded by the learned Single Judge as well as by the Letters Patent Bench of the High Court and the Additional District Judge too having used it only in a limited way, as disclosed in his reasoning.
A 23, one Kanal of land was sold for Rs.15,000 on 6.6.79, vide Ex.
In point of situation, plot companyered under Ex.
The remaining sales were from 18.12.78 to 11.7.84 The instant acquisition being of 20.12.77 the only sale prior to that date which companyld be relevant in point of time was of 1 1/2 Marla of land 1 1/13 of a Kanal on 16.11.77 disclosing at its price per acre at Rs.
A 16, one Kanal of land was sold for Rs.
A 23 and as such was about 3x1/2 years after the date of the numberification.
Since these transactions took place after the Notification under section 4 of the Act, so one third of the average price is to be deducted to wards the road and parks and, thus, after deducting 1/3rd price, its market value again companyes to Rs.1,20,000 per acre.
Sale Ex.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
A 16 neither appealed to the learned Single Judge number to the Letters Patent Bench.
The Additional District Judge on receipt of the references went into the matter and held the references by the Food Corporation of India barred under the Proviso to sub section 2 of Section 50 of the Act.
On that premises, the Additional District Judge determined the market value of the land at Rs.
The assessment at the rate of Rs.1,20,000 per acre was affirmed but on a different reason ing than the one adopted by the Additional District Judge.
The Addi tional District Judge after examining the matter awarded a uniform rate of Rs.
A 16 and Ex.
A 24 and the presently acquired land.
A 24 in the light of Exhibit A 1 lies along with Abohar Dabwali road and a railway line inter venes the two blocks of land, i.e., one companyered by Ex.
Before the learned Single Judge in the High Court in appeal,the claimant land owners abandoned reliance on Exs.
This sale for whatever reason, was overlooked by the Additional District Judge.
1,20,000 per acre, as observed above.
The lower companyrt has al ready, as pointed out above, reduced the rate by Rs.
A 16 and A 23 Vide sale deed Ex.
In the other references, the Food Corporation of India as well as State of Punjab were arrayed by the claimant land owners themselves as respondents.
Advocate for the claimant land owners.
Besides he rejected all the sale instances provided by the State show ing market rate far far below than what was claimed by the claimants.
He, however, fell for two later sales Ex.
The dispute is about the companyrect assessment of the market value of the land acquired by the state of Punjab for the Food Corporation of India.
1711 1737 of 1992.
Notice was issued to the companytesting parties indicating to them that the matter may finally be disposed of at the numberice stage itself Therefore these have been heard in full.
Rajinder Sachhar, A. Mariarputham and Mrs. Aruna Mathur for the Respondents.
The others were of areas less than even half a kanal or even lesser.
L. Sanghi and Y.P. Rao for the Appellants.
Advocate has been heard and Mr. Rajinder Sachar, Sr.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by PUNCHHI, J. In this batch of 87 matters,19 are special leave petitions preferred by the Food Corporation of India through its District Manager, Faridkot, Punjab, and the remaining by some claimant land owners against the Food Corporation of India.
This instance was rightly rejected by the Additional District Judge.
