STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC.versusJOGINDER SINGH ETC

A                   STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC.
                                           v.
                             JOGINDER SINGH ETC.

                                JANUARY 24, 1997

B               [K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.]

          Land Acquisition Act, 1894:

          Compensation-Award of-District Judge taking into account the
    potentiality of the land for urban purposes, as also the fact that a canal passed
C   through several lands-Awarding different rates for different lands-Single
    Judge of High Court awarding unifonn rate-Finding-Mere opinion of the
    Single Judge--Hence set aside--Award of District Judge confinned-
    Claimants not entitled to interest on solatium.

D        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 479 of
    1997 Etc.

         From the Judgment and Order dated 3.9.87 of the Punjab & Haryana
    High Court in L.P.A. No. 291of1987.

E         Rao Ranjit and Prem Malhotra for the Appeallants.

          Rajesh Srivastava, Ujjwal Benerjee H.K.Puri and Ms. Naresh Bakshi
    for the Respondents.

          The following Order of the Court was delivered:
F         Delay condoned. Substitution allowed. Leave granted.

           We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

           Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
G acquiring a long strip of land admeasuring 2916 acres, for digging Panjok-
    hara minor was published on June 24, 1982. The Collector in his award
    dated September 13, 1982 determined the market value at Rs. 26,000 for
    Abbi lands, Rs. 20,000 for barani lands and Rs.10,000 in respect of gair-           ._ ,,
    mumkin land. On reference under Section 18, the Additional District Judge
    enhance the compensation to Rs. 93,000 per acre for abbi land, Rs. 84,000
H   per acre for barani land and Rs. 50,000 per acre for gairmumkin land. On
                                       528
                      STATE v. JOGINDER SINGH                         529
appeal by the claimant, the learned single Judge awarded uniform rate of A
value and determined the compensation at uniform rate of Rs.93,000 per
acre in respect of all the lands. Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State
was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved by this Order in LPA, the appellants have
filed this appeal by special leave.
                                                                             B
      The only question is: whether the learned Judge was right in award-
ing uniform rate of compensation? Though the State had filed an appeal
in the High Court questioning the market value determined by the District
Judge at aforestated rates, it has placed no material before us to adjudge
whether the market value given by the District Judge was correct in law.
As regards potentiality of the land for urban purposes, as found by the      c
High Court, the District Judge in his award dealt with in extenso in
paragraph 14 of the judgment as under :

         "As regards the oral evidence produced by the petitioners to show
         that the acquired land had great potential value for commercial D
         and residential purposes I am of the opinion that the said oral
         evidence produced by the petitioners is not sufficient to hold that
         the acquired land had any potential value to be used for commer-
         cial or residential purposes. The acquired land is out side the
         municipal limits and is towards the west of Ambala town. Merely
         because the Government godowns or the railway station are at E
         same distance from the acquired land would be no ground to hold
         that the acquired land would land had any potential value unless
         there is cogent evidence to show that there was over all develop-
        .ment towards that side, similar is the position with regards to
         Lyalpur Basti in as much as the said Basti is at some distance from F
         the acquired land as stated by PW3 Prem Nath the said Basti is
         within municipal limits. Similarly, the existence of Agricultural
         research institute towards the acquired land would also not show
         that the acquired land has any potential value. RW I Yogdhian
         Patwari, admitted the distance of Ram DB_ss Nagar at some dis- G
         tance from the acquired land and in my opinion the existence of
         the said Ram Dass Nagar would not shown that the acquired iand
         had any potential value. There is no cogent evidence on the record
         to show that there was any general development of Ambala city
         towards to acquired land not there is any evidence on the record
         lo show that the acquired land was connected by any important H
    530                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [1997) 1 S. C.R.
                                                                                               .......
                                                                                     -J
A           road. The Ambala Patiala road known as Kapuri road which goes
            from Ambala to Patiala via a short out through the villages, only
            bifurcates the acquired land at a particular point where as the
            acquired land is along strip at a particular point where as the
            acquired land is along strip of land which had been acquired for
            construction of Panjokhra Minor. Even otherwise, there is no
B
            evidence on the record to show that there was any development
            on the said Kapuri Road. The existence of the Kapuri Road and             _. ..-
            the location of the acquired land is clear from the ask Shajra Ex.
            R.I. produced on the record on behalf of the State. Ar:cordingly I
            hold that the acquired land had no potential value of any kind and
c           was pure and simple agricultural land."

           In that view of the matter, it was held that the lands are agricultural
    lands and, therefore, the lands bore no potentiality as on the date of the
    notification for being used for building purposes. However, the opinion of
    the learned single Judge was thus :
D
            "I have carefully gone through the site plan produced on the record
            and am of the view that the. entire area is in the close vicinity of
            the Ambala City and its Municipal boundary. Although at the
            present moment crops are being sown but on the given facts, it
E           can be hardly disputed that the land covered by the acquisition
            had potential for urban purposes."

           The finding, therefore, is a mere opinion of the learned single Judge
    without any discussion of the factual matrix, as was done by the District
    Judge. When the canal is passing through several lands, what is material              ).

F   to be taken note of is : what would be the price the land was capable to
    fetch as on the date of Section 4(1) notification in an open market between
    willing vender and willing vendee. The High Court took into account future
    developments.

          Accordingly, we set aside the order of the High Court and confirm
G that of District Judge as regards determination of the compensation by the
    District Judge at the rates mentioned hereinbefore. In paragraph 15, the
    learned Judge has relied upon similar award, Ex. P3 dated September 4,
    1984 with regard to the lands in village Singhwala about which he stated              ~(
    that the distance between the lands in the present village and the Singhwala
H   is hardly 5 to 6 kilas. Under these circumstances and in the absence of any
I

                           STATE v. JOGINDER SINGH                           531
    evidence placed before us, we are left with no option but to affirm the A
    award of the District Judge.

          The Order of the High Court stands set aside. The award of the
    District Judge stands confirmed. The learned single Judge has also
    awarded interest on solarium. In view of the decision of this Court, the
    claimants are not entitled to interest on solatium and to that extent also it   B
    stands set aside.

         The appeals are accordingly allowed but in the circumstances
    without costs.

    G.N.                                                   Appeals are allowed.     C