Sawaran Kaur (deceased) through L.Rs. and Others vs Punjab State and Others

Rajesh Bindal, J.—The land owners are in appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the super structure existing on the acquired land.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 10.10.1978, issued u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ''the Act''), land along with super structure existing thereon was acquired by the State of Punjab for development of New Mandi at Dhariwal. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, ''the Collector'') vide award dated 12.3.1983, assessed the compensation of the super structure at Rs. 30,625/ -. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference u/s 18 of the Act, the learned court below upheld the award of the Collector.

Learned Counsel for the land owners submitted that the amount of compensation, as has been assessed by the Collector for the super structure existing on the acquired land and upheld by the learned court below is quite on lower side. The construction, which was admittedly existing on the acquired land was measuring 1,322 square feet. Part of that was under the tenancy of Punjab State Electricity Board and part was under the tenancy of private persons. The same was being used for commercial purposes. The assessment of value thereof by the Collector merely @ Rs. 21/ - per square feet is quite meagre and the Appellants deserve to be granted compensation in terms of the evidence led by them, whereby the value thereof has been assessed at Rs. 4,51,000/ -.

On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that assessment of fair value of the super structure existing on the acquired land by the Collector was just and fair. The evidence led by the land owners in that regard is simply to be discarded considering the fact that it was admitted by the person, who produced the estimate that he had valued the property as per 1990 rates, whereas the land in the present case along with super structure was acquired way back in the year 1978. However, he did not dispute the fact that portion of the acquired super structure was in possession of Punjab State Electricity Board at a monthly rent of Rs. 289/ -.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record.

As far as existence of 1,322 square feet covered area on the acquired land is concerned, the same is not in dispute as even the estimate produced by the State also mentions that area. The only dispute is regarding its valuation. The State had assessed the cost of construction thereof @ Rs. 21/ - per square feet. The estimate produced by the land owners cannot be considered as such for the reason that assessment therein had been made as per 1990 rates, whereas the land in question along with super structure was acquired way back in the year 1978. However, still considering the fact that part of the super structure existing on the acquired land was in occupancy of Punjab State Electricity Board as a tenant, it can very well be assumed that quality of construction was reasonable. Though the land owners claimed that other portion of the constructed area was in occupation of the private persons on rent, however, even if that evidence is ignored, still, in my opinion, the assessment of compensation by the Collector Rs. 30,625/ - is quite on lower side and applying a thumb rule, increase @ 50% would be quite reasonable. Accordingly, adding Rs. 15,300/ - therein, the amount of compensation is assessed at Rs. 45,925/ -. The land owners shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits available to them under the Act.

The appeal is disposed of in the manner indicated above.