1 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases 348 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases Reserved on : 04.02.2025 Date of decision: 21.04.2025 Jawali Bai Nathu Ram Ahuja Educational Charitable Trust ..Appellants Versus Union of India and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL Present: Mr. Piyush Setia, Advocate for the appellant in RFA Nos.3147 & 3148 of 2016. Mr. C.M. Munjal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sunil Kumar Sharma, Sr. Panel Counsel for the respondent-UOI in RFA-9052-2014. Mr. Brijeshwar Singh Kanwar, Sr. Panel Counsel for the respondents-UOI in RFAs No. 225 to 230 of 2015. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. Preface:- 1.1 With the consent of the learned counsel representing the parties, a batch of 40 connected cross appeals (details whereof are at the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of by this common order. 1.2 In all these appeals, market value of the acquired land for construction of Abohar Fazilka New Broad Gauge Railway line has come up for assessment. The necessary and important details of acquisition are as under:- Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 2 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases 28.03.2003 Notification under section 4 of the 1894 Act was published. 26.08.2004 Notification under Section 6 was published The land was acquired from Village Awa, Khuikhera, Dangerkhera, Heranwali, Ghallu, Jandwala Kharta, Sultanpura and Abohar-II (grouping report on the top of the paperbook), District Ferozepur. 14.07.2006 With respect to acquired land located in villages Awa, Khuikhera, Dangerkhera, Heranwali, Ghallu, Jandwala Kharta and Sultanpura the LAC offered to pay Rs.2,25,000/- per acre for agricultural land. In Village Sultanpura, Rs.7,00,000/- per acre was awarded for acquisition of Gair Mumkin land i.e non-agricultural. 28.02.2005 With respect to Village Abohar-II, the LAC assessed the market value in the following manner:- Sr. No. Particulars Amount 1. Land measuring 3 kanals 8 marlas Rs.48 lacs per acre 2. Land measuring 31 kanals 12 marlas Rs.19,20,000/- per acre 3. Land measuring 88 kanals 3 marlas Rs.3 lacs per acre 4. Land measuring 89 kanals 8 marlas Rs.6 lacs per acre 5. Land falling with revenue limit of Village Burj Muhar measuring 413 kanals 15 marlas Rs.3 lacs per acre For construction, cost of Well and Tubewell, cost of trees and fruit garden were assessed in the following manner:- Sr.No. Particulars Amount 1. Cost of building & Structure Rs.2,49,859/- 2. Cost of Well & tubewell Rs.1,06,953/- 3. Cost of trees Rs.1,23,393/- 4. Cost of fruit garden Rs.13,060/- 1.3 The Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as ‘RC’) dismissed all the petitions filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’) by separate awards passed on 31.05.2014, 16.08.2014, 16.09.2014, 07.10.2014, 14.07.2014, 31.05.2014 and 25.07.2014. 2. Arguments Addressed:- Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 3 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases 2.1 In all these batches, the landowners claim that the acquired land was located near Abohar Town and had potential to be used for residential and commercial purpose. While relying upon Ex. P1, layout plan produced by the landowners, it has been argued that the acquired land was near the National Highway and the bypass road. There exists Alpine School, Baba Singh Nagar Khalsa College, Central Institute of Post Harvesting and Engineering & Technology Research Centre, Educational Institution, Nursing Home and various residential colonies near the acquired land. They further submit that the RC has erred in overlooking award Ex.P26, announced by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as ‘LAC’) assessing the market value with respect to the acquisition of land in village Awa. They also rely upon application filed for permission to lead additional evidence in RFA-9743-2014. 2.2 Per contra, learned counsel representing the UOI has submitted that the LAC has assessed the amount after taking into consideration its quality and location of the acquired land. While referring to LAC’s award of Village Sultanpura, learned counsel submit that Gair Mumkin land was assessed at the rate of Rs.7,00,000/- per acre whereas in the area of Abohar II the acquire land was assessed at a much higher price. 3. Discussion & Analysis:- 3.1 This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel representing the parties and analyzed their arguments. 3.2 The landowners have also examined a significantly large number of witnesses in their oral evidence to prove the location of the property. Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 4 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases 3.3 In the cases arising from Village Sultanpura, the landowners have relied upon the following sale instances:- Exhibit Date Area Rate Rate per acre P-17 07.04.20 04 150 sq. feet 300/- per feet 1,32,00,000 P-19 15.09.20 05 3 marlas 25000/- total 13,33,333.33 P-21 29.09.20 04 8 marlas 6000/- per marla 9,60,000 P-23 16.11.20 05 1 marla 67,500/- total 1,08,00,000 P-25 21.01.20 05 360 sq. feet 36,000/- total 44,00,000 P-67 02.06.20 03 4 marlas 48,000/- total 19,20,000 3.4 On the other hand, UOI has relied upon the following sale instances:- Exhibit Date Area Rate Rate per acre R-34 12.05.2003 34 kanals 14 marlas 7,37,500/- total 1,70,028.8 R-35 24.05.2004 10 kanals 2 marlas 2,15,000/- total 1,70,247.03 3.5 As per Part I of Section 23 (1) of the 1894 Act, the market value of the acquired land is required to be assessed, the date of publication of notification under Section 4 i.e. 28.03.2003. All the sale instances produced by the landowners are with respect to the period post 28.03.2003. Similar is the position of the sale deeds produced by the respondent. 3.6 A perusal of the various layout plans proves that a narrow strip of land was acquired for laying new broad gauge railway line. Most of the acquired land is at a distance from residential and commercial area. No doubt, a bypass road is located near the acquired land. However, that itself Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 5 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases is not sufficient to assess the market value of the acquired land. The bypass road has been constructed for bypassing Abohar city while going towards Ganganagar which is located in the State of Rajasthan. Near the acquired land, National Highway no.10, which is known as Malout Road is located. 3.7 All the educational and commercial establishments are located on either on the bypass road or the National Highway. Certain residential colonies have been shown in the site plan however, these are located at a sufficient distance. 3.8 For assessing the market value of the acquired land, the landowners are required to lead concrete evidence to prove that the amount offered by the LAC was insufficient. As already noticed, the sale deeds relied upon by the landowners are with respect to the period post notification under Section 4 i.e 28.03.2003. The RC in the separate awards has discussed the evidence in detail and found that there is no evidence to prove that the amount offered by the LAC was not sufficient. In fact, if we examine the sale deeds produced by UOI, it becomes evident that the agricultural land was being sold at a price less than the amount offered by the LAC. Vide sale deed Ex.R-35, more than 1 acre of land i.e 10 Kanals 2 Marlas was sold after one year and two months from the date of notification under Section 4 for Rs.2,15,000/-. It depicts that the land was being sold below Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. Similarly, Ex.R34 also proves that the land was being sold at a price lower than Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. 3.9 In RFA no.9743 of 2014, the landowners have filed an application (CM-3673-CI-2023) under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) to produce copy of Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 6 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases judgment passed on 29.03.2019 in RFA-3133-2008 State of Punjab and another vs. Surinder Ahuja and another, site plan. The market value of the acquired land vide notifications dated 14.11.2000 and 24.11.2000 with respect to the following villages was assessed as follows:- Ref. Court Award date Difference 1. Sabuana 25.35 acre 22.09.2006 10% only Severance 2. Odian/Qddian 51.01 acre 22.09.2006 17.12.2007 10% only Severance 5 lakhs plus 50% severance 3. Karni Khera 50.21 acre 13.11.2007 5 lakhs plus 50% severance 4. Awa 33.14 acre 11.10.2007 Rs.2,56,000+ 3 lakhs 10% severance 5. Kotha 15.76 acre 11.10.2007 Rs.2,56,000 10 % severance 6. Alamshah 31.88 acre 20.02.2007 10.01.2008 20% only severance Rs.5 lakhs 50% severance 7. Salem Shah 46.26 acre 18.07.2007 10% only severance 8. Mauzam 6.96 acre 04.08.2007 20% only severance 9. Dona Sikandari 13.2 acres (as per award of LAC) 28.03.2007 Rs.2,56,000/- + 20% severance 10. Muhar Kheewa 52.83 acre 28.03.2007 Rs.2,56,000/- + 20% severance 11. Muhar Jamsher 17.72 acre 28.03.20070 Rs.2,56,000/- + 20% severance 3.10 In the aforesaid batch of appeals, the market value of the acquired land in Village Awa was also assessed. The appellant prays for grant of increase on the basis of market value assessed in the aforesaid judgment. It may be noted here that vide notification dated 14.11.2000 and 24.11.2000 the land was acquired for the purpose of construction of Aspal Extension Drain/Ditch Channel from RD no.0 to 62500 falling in Satluj River. However, there is no evidence that the location of acquired land vide notification dated 14.11.2000 and 24.11.2000 was comparable with the acquired land vide notification dated 28.03.2000 for construction of Abohar Fazilka New Broad Gauge Railway Line. In the layout plan produced by the Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 7 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases appellant the location of Railway Line has been reflected whereas location of drain has not been shown. In the absence thereof, it is not possible to compare the location of the land acquired through two different notifications. Hence, the application for additional evidence is dismissed. 3.11 In the additional evidence, the appellant does not claim that through notifications dated 14.11.2000 and 24.11.2000, his land located in the vicinity was acquired. He is only making a reference to acquisition of land from the same village. The price of the entire land in a village is not likely to be uniform. It depends upon the location, quality of soil and connectivity and various other factors. Hence, it would not be appropriate to assess the market value on the basis of the market value assessed for a different notification. 4. Decision:- 4.1 Consequently, finding no merit, all these appeals are dismissed. 4.2 All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of. (ANIL KSHETARPAL) 21.04.2025 JUDGE rekha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Sr. No. Case No. Appellant(s) Respondent(s) 1. RFA-9052-2014 JAWALI BAI NATHU RAM AHUJA EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2. RFA-9332-2014 SANJEEV KUMAR AND ANR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 3. RFA-9333-2014 SATISH CHANDER UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 4. RFA-9334-2014 TILAK RAJ UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 8 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases 5. RFA-9335-2014 RAJESH KUMAR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 6. RFA-9336-2014 DARSHNA RANI UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 7. RFA-9337-2014 KISHORE SINGH AND ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 8. RFA-9338-2014 SHIVANI UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 9. RFA-9339-2014 SUBHASH CHANDER UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 10.RFA-9340-2014 NEELAM RANI & ANR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 11. RFA-9341-2014 RAKESH KUMAR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 12.RFA-9342-2014 DARSHNA RANI & ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 13.RFA-9343-2014 RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 14.RFA-9606-2014 MANISH KATARIA AND ORS. UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 15.RFA-9607-2014 MANOJ KUMAR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 16.RFA-9743-2014 VINAY SETIA UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 17.RFA-10448- 2014 DALBIR SINGH & ORS UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 18.RFA-10449- 2014 MUKAND LAL UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 19.RFA-10450- 2014 MAHABIR UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 20.RFA-10451- 2014 MOHAN LAL & ANR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 21.RFA-10452- 2014 PRITAM DASS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 22.RFA-10453- 2014 SHANTI DEVI & ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 23.RFA-10454- 2014 YOG RAJ & ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 24.RFA-10455- 2014 JAGDISH DASS ALIAS JAGSIR DASS THROUGH HIS LRS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 25.RFA-10456- 2014 OM PARKASH & ANR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 26.RFA-10593- 2014 BHARTI DEVI AND ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 27.RFA-225-2015 ASHOK KUMAR & ORS UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 28.RFA-226-2015 RAJINDER KUMAR & ORS UNION GOVT OF INDIA Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh 9 RFA-9052-2014(O&M) and other connected cases & ORS 29.RFA-227-2015 VIJAY SINGH & ORS UNION GOVT OF INDIA & ORS 30.RFA-228-2015 RAJINDER KUMAR & ORS UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 31.RFA-229-2015 ASHOK KUMAR & ORS UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 32.RFA-230-2015 ASHOK KUMAR & ORS UNION GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS 33.RFA-30-2015 DHARAMPAL DECEASED THROUGH HIS LRS & ORS UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS 34.RFA-2931-2015 NAND KISHORE AND ANR UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 35.RFA-3147-2016 NIRMALJIT SINGH THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, ABOHAR & ORS. 36.RFA-3148-2016 RAMANDEEP SINGH & ANR. THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, ABOHAR & ORS. 37.RFA-3149-2016 JASMER KAUR THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, ABOHAR & ORS. 38.RFA-3912-2016 GURDIT SINGH THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, ABOHAR & ORS. 39.RFA-4134-2016 SHIVRAJ SINGH THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, ABOHAR & ORS. 40.RFA-4135-2016 HARINDER SINGH THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, ABOHAR & ORS. (ANIL KSHETARPAL) 21.04.2025 JUDGE rekha Rekha Sihag 2025.05.13 02:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh