Sale Deeds Executed After Acquisition Notice Can’t Be Taken To Be Exemplar For Determining Exact Value: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that the sale deeds executed after acquisition notice cannot be taken to be exemplar for determining the exact value.

An Appeal was preferred before the Court, which arose out of an award passed by the Additional District Judge, by which the Reference Petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (LA Act) was allowed.

A Single Bench of Justice Romesh Verma observed, “The learned Reference Court has rightly not relied upon the remaining sale deeds since these are subsequent and later in time to the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act. Moreover, remaining sale deeds cannot be taken to be an exemplar for determining the exact value of the acquired land, but they can show only potential value and assessment of the land in area.”

Deputy Advocate General (DAG) J.S. Guleria appeared for the Appellants, while Senior Advocate Bhuvnesh Sharma and Advocate Parv Sharma appeared for the Respondents.

Case Background

A land was utilized by the Appellants for the construction of Water Supply Scheme (WSC) in a village. A notification under Section 4 of the LA Act was issued by the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) and pursuantly, a notification under Section 6 of LA Act was issued. The LAC awarded compensation in favour of the Respondents for the acquisition of land. As far as house/structure and trees are concerned, it was observed by the LAC that neither there is any house/structure nor any tree was existing over the acquired land. The LAC awarded compulsory acquisition charges @ 30% of the market value of land as per the LA Act to the Respondents in addition to the market value of the land under Section 23(2) of the Act, which was worked out to be Rs. 10,078/-.

Further, an amount @ 12% per annum was ordered to be paid to the Respondents in addition to the market value of the land under Section 23(1-A) of the Act from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 to the date of award of the Collector. Thus, compensation was worked out to be Rs. 10,293/-. The total amount of compensation was finally determined and awarded for the acquired land. Being dissatisfied with the award passed, the Respondents preferred a Petition before the Reference Court for enhancement of compensation. An application for condonation of delay was also preferred and the Reference Petition was allowed. This was under challenge before the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in the above context of the case, said, “In the present case, the land has been acquired for the purpose of water supply scheme, therefore, it cannot be said that the subsequent sale deeds would be with an intention to show the higher prices of the land in the area.”

The Court noted that the documents and exhibited sale deeds, on which the counsel for the Respondents has placed reliance for enhancement of the award, are subsequent to the issuance of notification as issued by the LAC and as a result whereof, the possibility of these sale-deeds being for the purpose of inflating the price cannot be ruled out, moreover, when on being asked by the Court, no legal pronouncement was placed on record to substantiate the contention.

“Therefore, under such circumstances, the respondents have failed to make out a case for enhancement of compensation. No error or infirmity has been committed by the learned Reference Court while passing the impugned award”, it added.

The Court, therefore, concluded that the Reference Court has rightly assessed the market value of the acquired land to be Rs. 14,000/- per marla.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal.

Cause Title- Secretary (IPH) & Ors. v. Mangal Devi (died and deleted) & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:HHC:37595)

Appearance:

Appellants: DAG J.S. Guleria

Respondents: Senior Advocate Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocates Parv Sharma, and Shekhar Badola.

Click here to read/download the Judgment