LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/horrmal-deceased-through-his-lrs-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-20241021/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Horrmal (Deceased) Through His LRs & Ors. vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
21 October 2024
Case No.
Civil Appeal No. 11758 of 2024
Result
Allowed
Bench
Surya Kant, K.V. Viswanathan
Citation
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 1709 : 2024 INSC 797
Acts & Sections
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Haryana Urban Development Authority Act…
Supreme Court Reports [2024] 10 S.C.R. 1709 : 2024 INSC 797
Issue for consideration
(1) Whether the appellants are entitled to higher compensation for their acquired lands, and if so, to what extent; and

(2) Whether the methodology for calculating the quantum of such compensation has been appropriately applied.
Headnote

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – ss.4, 6, 23(1) – Assessment of Market Value for Acquired Lands – Comparable Sales Method – Deduction for Developmental Charges: Held: Compensation for acquired lands must reflect their fair market value as of the date of the Section 4 notification – The "comparable sales method" is the preferred approach, using bona fide sales exemplars of similar land – The ‘market value’ is to be assessed with reference to factors such as standing crops and trees, the severance of part of the land, damage to movable or immovable property or earnings, the need to relocate one’s residence or business, and any loss of profits from the land between the publication of the declaration under Section 6 and the Collector's assumption of possession – Sale deeds of smaller parcels can be considered but must undergo appropriate deductions to account for developmental charges – Deductions may range from 20% to 75%, depending on the nature and location of the land. [Paras 18, 19, 26, 30]

Compensation – Reliance on Best Sale Exemplars – Judicial Guidelines for Determination of Fair Value:

Held: When multiple comparable sale exemplars exist, the highest bona fide exemplar should be preferred, provided it meets legal criteria – Even when averaging values, the highest exemplar may be considered to ensure fair compensation – The Reference Court’s valuation of ₹92,62,500 per acre aligns with market potential and statutory requirements, and the High Court erred in reducing it. [Paras 28, 35, 37]

Principle of Potentiality – Strategic Location of Acquired Land – Enhancement of Compensation:

Held: The acquired land’s strategic location and potential for nonagricultural development must be factored into the compensation. Lands situated near urban areas, major highways, or industrial zones have higher potential value – Deductions should not undermine this potentiality. [Paras 32, 33, 36]

Keywords: Land Acquisition · Market Value · Comparable Sales Method · Development Charges · Potentiality of Land

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Harshit Anand, Hony. Associate Editor (Verified by: Kanu Agrawal, Adv.). Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Surya Kant, J. Delay condoned. Leave granted. 2. These appeals are preferred by the expropriated landowners (hereinafter ‘Appellants’), impugning the judgement dated 23.08.2022 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh (hereinafter, ‘High Court’), whereby their appeals seeking further enhancement in compensation for their acquired lands, have been dismissed. As a necessary corollary, the High Court has allowed the cross appeals filed by the Respondent State, challenging the enhancement in compensation made by the Reference Court. Consequently, the Awards passed by
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

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.

All SC judgments →