1 ( 2025:HHC:25585 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RFA No.38 of 2016 a/w RFA No.501 of 2015 and RFA No.39 of 2016 Date of Decision : 31.07.2025 RFA No.38 of 2016 The Land Acquisition Collector and others …… Appellants Versus Bhagat Ram and others ……Respondents RFA No.501 of 2015 The Land Acquisition Collector and others …… Appellants Versus Soharu (deceased) through LRs. and others ……Respondents RFA No.39 of 2016 The Land Acquisition Collector and others …… Appellants Versus Krishnu and others ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the appellants : Mr. Manish Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, in all the appeals. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2025:HHC:25585 ) For the respondents : Mr. O.C. Sharma, Advocate, in all the appeals. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) CMP No.6953 of 2019 in RFA No.38 of 2016 CMP No.14653 of 2020 in RFA No.501 of 2015 CMP No.6950 of 2019 in RFA No.39 of 2016 These applications are dismissed as not pressed. RFA No.38 of 2016, RFA No.501 of 2015 and RFA No.39 of 2016 The aforesaid matters are being taken up together as they arise out of the same acquisition proceedings. Section 4 notification in the case at hand was issued on 11.12.2006. The said notification was published in two daily newspapers on 30.12.2006. The acquisition admittedly pertained to lands in Village Doli, Bahalam, Dolru and Nerli. The Land Acquisition Collector based on market value of land in Mauja Bahalam assessed value of the acquired land on the basis of classification of land and accordingly awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.69,083/- including statutory benefits as per the award dated 01.09.2008. 2. Feeling aggrieved of the same, present respondents herein preferred reference petitions filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The petition so filed by the respondents were consolidated vide order dated 11.12.2009 and were taken up jointly for adjudication. In order to assess the market value of the lands acquired, numerous exemplars (sale deeds) were produced by the respondents before the reference Court. Out of the numerous exemplars placed on record, reference Court had placed reliance on the highest exemplar Exhibit PW-2/C. This sale deed pertained to a land 3 ( 2025:HHC:25585 ) sold in Village Doli (one of the villages wherein lands were being acquired in the case at hand). A perusal of the said sale deed reveals that one Surender Pal had sold land measuring two biswas for Rs.1,70,000/-. The land sold by Surender Pal formed a part of a larger chunk of land which measured eight biswas, in which, Surender Pal had 1/3rd share. 3. Finding the same to be a bona fide transaction and a highest exemplar for determining the market value, the reference Court based its award on the said sale deed. However in assessing the value of the land acquired, a 20 per cent deduction was made in the price so determined based on Exhibit PW-2/C. In determining the compensation in the case at hand and on basing the same on the highest exemplar, the reference Court followed the General Rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it satisfied that it is a bona fide transaction, must be considered and accepted. 4. By way of the present appeals, the State has laid a challenge to the award dated 16.01.2015 passed by the reference Court. The contentions of the appellants/State are twofold. (A). namely that the sale deed which has formed the basis for determining the market value does not pertain to the same Mauja. (b) Besides the aforesaid, appellants contend that basis for determination of the compensation is a small piece of land of two biswas detailed in Exhibit PW-2/C. 5. The first contention is devoid of any merit as acquisition in the case at hand has taken place in four villages namely Doli, Bahalam, Dolaru and Nerli . The lands have been acquired for construction of a road which already stands constructed. The sale deed whereupon reliance has been placed (Exhibit PW- 2/C), is a sale deed which pertains to land sold in Village Doli. Doli is one of 4 ( 2025:HHC:25585 ) the Villages wherein lands have been acquired for the purpose of construction of the road in the case at hand. 6. Insofar as the second contention is raised, suffice it to state that it is a well settled principle of law that a small piece of land can be taken into consideration for determining value of a large chunk of land with a rider that while taking such instances into consideration, a reasonable deduction keeping in view attendant circumstances needs to be made. In the case at hand, a deduction of 20% has already been made by the reference Court while passing the impugned award. In view thereof, I find no merit in the second contention so raised by the appellants/State. 7. In view of the aforesaid terms the appeals stand dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. + (Bipin Chander Negi) July 31, 2025 (KS) Judge