The
State of Punjab Vs. Gurdial Singh with Civil
Miscellaneous Petition No. 6336 [1995] INSC 338 (26 July 1995)
Ramaswamy,
K. Ramaswamy, K. Paripoornan, K.S.(J)
CITATION:
1995 SCC (5) 331 1995 SCALE (4)594
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
O R D
E R
A
notification under s.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the
State Gazette of Punjab on October 26, 1971
acquiring 70 Canals 48 Marlas of land for establishing a Mandi (Market). The
Land Acquisition Officer in his award dated February 18, 1972 classified the land into three categories and determined
the compensation at Rs.40,000/- & 10,000/- per acre respectively. On
reference under s.18, the Additional District Judge in his award and decree
dated June 3, 1976 classified the land into 5 categories and determined the
compensation at the rate of Rs.65,000/-, 50,000/-, 25,000/-,20,000/-and
15,000/- per acre respectively.
Dissatisfied
there with,the claimants filled the appeal. The learned single Judge by his judgement
and decree dated August
31, 1979 determined the
compensation at a flat rate of Rs.70,000/- per acre of the entire land. The
learned single Judge has noted in the judgment that the counsel for the State
and the claimants have agreed that the point raised in the appeal was squarely
covered by a decision of that court in State of Punjab v. Chand Singh, R.F.A.
No. 1413/77 dated August 23, 1979. Following that judgement the state's appeal
as well as the claimants' cross objections were disposed of accordingly. The
Division Bench dismissed the appeal. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
It is
rather unfortunate that nothing has been placed on record whether the State has
carried the decision of the Division Bench in Chand Singh's case in appeal to
this court and if so what was its result. Further, even that judgment has not
been made part of record. Therefore, we are not in a position to know on what
principle the learned Judge had granted a flat rate to the entire land. But in
this case since the claimants as well as well as the State relied upon the said
judgment and requested the Court to dispose of the matter in terms thereof,
without any material on record, it will be difficult for this Court to find
whether the determination of Rs. 70,000/- per acre and at a flat rate was
proper compensation. Accordingly we are constrained to dismiss the appeal for
the aforesaid reasons. No costs.
Since
the record has not been printed, the Registry is directed to refund printing
charges.
Back