Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – s.4 – Compensation – Enhancement of – Land in question came to be acquired under the provisions of the 1894 Act for setting up of Liquified Petroleum Gas Plant – Land Acquisition Officer determined and awarded the compensation @ Rs.5,30,000 per acre for irrigated lands and Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre for non-irrigated lands – Reference Court fixed compensation at Rs.5,30,000/- per acre for both irrigated as well as the non-irrigated land – The High Court enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.7,00,000/- per acre – Before the High Court and the Reference Court, the landowners had heavily relied upon the sale exemplars/sale instances produced as Ex. P1 to Ex.P4 – The High Court discarded the sale instances Exs. P1, P3 and P4 relied upon on behalf of the landowners by observing that there is a price variation between the sale deeds produced as Ex. P1 and the sale deeds produced as Exs. P3 and P4, thus opined that sale deeds produced as Exs. P3 and P4 are not genuine – On appeal, held: The sale deeds Exs. P1, P3 and P4 were by and/or in favour of a company and the variation in the prices mentioned in the Exs. P1, P3 and P4 cannot be a ground to hold Exs. are not genuine – Exs. P3 and P4 are with respect to the smaller parcel of land considering that there has to be a proper deduction – Looking at Location, potentiality and the purpose of acquired lands, not much development was required like the housing scheme and/or as required for other similar purposes, therefore, if 35% is deducted considering the evaluation with respect to Sale Deed at Ex. P4, the same can be said to be just, reasonable and proper compensation to the original landowners – Therefore, the original landowners shall be entitled to Rs. 12,16,800/- per acre towards compensation for the lands acquired – High Court judgment and order is modified to the said extent.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The reasoning given by the High Court discarding the sale exemplars/sale instances produced as Exs. P1, P3 and P4, this court is of the opinion that the High Court has committed a very serious error in discarding the sale instances/sale exemplars produced as Exs. P3 and P4. The High Court has not properly appreciated the fact that so far as the sale deed Ex. P1 is concerned, the same was executed by a company in favour of a private person and on the other hand, the sale deeds Exs. P3 and P4 were executed in favour of a company. Therefore, when after purchasing the land, a company had sold the land the prices are bound to be higher. Merely because the sale deeds Exs. P1, P3 and P4 were by and/or in favour of the company and there was variation in the prices mentioned in the Exs. P1, P3 and P4 cannot be a ground to hold that the sale exemplars Exs. P3 and P4 are not genuine and therefore required to be discarded. [Para 7][668A-C]
2. It will be safe to rely upon and/or consider the sale deeds produced as Exs. P3 and P4. However, at the same time, considering the fact that the Sale Deeds produced as Exs. P3 and P4 are with respect to the smaller parcel of land, there has to be a proper deduction on the ground of smaller area of the land and development. Looking to the location and the potentiality of the lands acquired and as the acquired lands were required to be used for Liquified Petroleum Gas Plant, not much development was required like the housing scheme and/or as required for other similar purposes, therefore, if 35% is deducted considering the evaluation with respect to Sale Deed at Ex. P4, the same can be said to be just, reasonable and proper compensation to the original landowners. Therefore, the original landowners shall be entitled to Rs. 12,16,800/- per acre towards compensation for the lands acquired. To the aforesaid extent, the impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court is required to be modified. [Para 8][668-D-F]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.