IMPORTANT POINT
While fixing value of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, certified copies of sale deed of comparable land can be considered without examining persons connected with the transactions mentioned therein.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Section 51A read with Section 23-Fixation of compensation-Determination of market value-High Court enhancing land value on basis of copy of sale deed marked without examining anybody connected with transaction-Cannot be faulted with-Certified copy of sale deed can be considered without examining persons connected with transactions mentioned.
       If the only purpose served by Section 51A is to enable the Court to admit the copy of the document in evidence there was no need for a legislative exercise because even otherwise the certified copy of the document could have been admitted in evidence. Section 64 of the Evidence Act says that "documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned." Section 65 mentions the cases in which secondary evidence can be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document. Section 57 of the Registration Act 1908 enables anyone to apply for copy of the entries in Book No.1 (the said Book is meant for keeping the register of the documents as well as non-testamentary documents relating to immovable property). When any person applies for a copy of it the same shall be given to him. Sub-section (5) of Section 57 of that Act says that "all copies given under this Section shall be signed and sealed by the registering officer and shall be admissible for the purpose of proving the contents of the original document." If the position regarding admissibility of the contents of a document which is a certified copy falling within the purview of Section 57(5) of the Registration Act was as adumbrated above, even before the introduction of Section 51A in the L.A. Act, could there be any legislative object in incorporating the said new provision through Act 68 of 1984? It must be remembered that the state has the burden to prove the market value of the lands acquired by it for which the state may have to depend upon the prices of lands similarly situated which were transacted or sold in the recent past, particularly those lands situated in the neighbouring areas. The practice had shown that for the state officials it was a burden to trace out the persons connected with such transactions mentioned in the sale-deeds and then to examine them in court for the purpose of proving such transactions. It was in the wake of the aforesaid practical difficulties that the new Section 51A was introduced in the L.A. Act. When the Section says that certified copy of a registered document "may be accepted as evidence of the transaction recorded in such document" it enables the court to treat what is recorded in the document, in respect of the transactions referred to therein, as evidence. (Paras 11, 12 and 13)
       The words "may be accepted as evidence" in the Section 51A indicate that there is no compulsion on the court to accept such transaction as evidence, but it is open to the court to treat them as evidence. Merely accepting them as evidence does not mean that the court is bound to treat them as reliable evidence. What is sought to be achieved is that the transactions recorded in the documents may be treated as evidence, just like any other evidence, and it is for the court to weigh all the pros and cons to decide whether such transaction can be relied on for understanding the real price of the land concerned. It is not possible to hold that even after the introduction of Section 51A the position would remain the same as before. (Paras 14 & 16)
       The High Court cannot therefore be faulted for relying on the transactions recorded in Ex.A2 and A4 though no one was examined for proving such transactions. No evidence had been adduced by the state for creating any doubt regarding the bona fides or genuineness of the transactions mentioned therein. It is true that the area of lands involved in those sale-deeds were relatively very small. Nonetheless, learned judges persuaded themselves to consider the sale price indicated therein along with the prices shown in other transactions mentioned in Ex.A1 and A3 also, for reaching the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land should have been Rs.75,000/- per acre. The increase made by the High Court is not so substantial as to warrant interference from this court. (Para 18)

Judgement Key Points

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

The court clarified that when fixing the value of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, certified copies of sale deeds of comparable land can be considered as evidence without the need to examine persons connected with those transactions (!) (!) .
The purpose of introducing a specific section in the Land Acquisition Act was to facilitate the use of certified copies of registered documents as evidence, recognizing practical difficulties faced by authorities in examining connected persons (!) .
The language "may be accepted as evidence" indicates that the court has the discretion to treat such documents as evidence, but it is not obliged to do so, and the reliability of the transaction recorded in the document is subject to judicial evaluation (!) (!) .
The admissibility of the contents of a certified copy is supported by provisions in related statutes, which allow such copies to be used as evidence of the recorded transaction, provided the document is properly certified and sealed by the appropriate officer (!) (!) .
The introduction of Section 51A was aimed at easing the burden on authorities by allowing courts to treat certified copies of registered documents as evidence of the recorded transactions, without necessarily examining connected persons (!) .
Even after the enactment of Section 51A, the court retains the discretion to accept or reject such documents as evidence based on the overall credibility and context, including whether the transaction appears bona fide (!) .
The court emphasized that the mere marking of a sale deed as evidence does not automatically establish the transaction's authenticity; examination of persons connected with the transaction remains relevant unless the statutory provisions explicitly allow otherwise (!) .
The court highlighted that other statutes also recognize the admissibility of reports or documents without examining the originating persons, provided the documents are properly certified and the court considers their contents credible (!) .
The court ultimately upheld the reliance on the certified copies of sale deeds, including those without examination of connected persons, when there is no reason to doubt their genuineness, and the transaction details are consistent with other evidence (!) .
The decision underscores that courts have the flexibility to consider such documents as evidence, but the weight given to them depends on the overall context and credibility, not solely on formal compliance with procedural requirements (!) .

Please let me know if you need further clarification or assistance.

JUDGMENT

Thomas, J.-Leave granted.

2. In a land acquisition case a division bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh enhanced land value to Rupees seventy five thousand and odd per acre over and above the market value fixed by the reference court. For making the aforesaid enhancement the division bench of the High Court took into consideration two sale-deeds the copy of which were marked without examining anybody connected with the transaction recorded in the instruments. Appellant is actually the State of Andhra Pradesh though in the cause-title it is shown as the Land Acquisition Officer concerned of the State. Appellant contended that the High Court should not have taken into account the sale price shown in the above mentioned two sale-deeds as the claimant did not examine the vendee or the vendor or anybody else connected with the sale. There are two decisions of this Court which propounded a legal position consistent with the above stand of the appellant State. They are Inder Singh v. UOI1 and P. Ram Reddy v. Land Acquisition Officer, Hyderabad2.

3. As the said decisions were rendered by two judges bench a plea was made before us by Sri Vidya Sagar, learned counsel arguing for the respondent that the aforesaid legal position may be reconsidered. Learned counsel submitted that Section 51A has been incorporated in the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for short the "the LA Act") specifically for obviating the insistence for examination of anyone connected with the transactions mentioned in such sale-deeds if the court has to consider such transactions as evidence in the case.

4. The facts are very simple. A land having an extent of 7.35 acres at Bheemagal Town has been acquired under the L.A. Act for a public purpose. Notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act was issued on 11.5.1984. The Land Acquisition Officer estimated the price of the said land as Rs.17,200/- per acre. The District Court, on reference being made under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, enhanced the land value to Rs.65,762/- per acre. Before the reference court, the landowner relied on Ex.A1 to A4, which are certified copies of registered sale-deeds relating to other lands. It was contended that those sale-deeds relate to similar lands and therefore the value of the land mentioned in such documents can be used as guidance for fixing up the market value of the acquired land.

5. Ex. A1 is the copy of sale-deed dated 28.8.1983, in respect of 0.02 guntas of land. PW2 the vendor shown in the said sale deed was examined before the reference court. Ex. A3 is the copy of the sale-deed dated 2.1.1984 in respect of three Guntas of land, for which PW3, the vendee, was examined by the claimant.

6. Ex. A2 and Ex. A4 are the copies of sale-deed dated 15.11.1983 and 24.3.1984 respectively, which are said to be the instruments relating to small plots of land situated in the vicinity of the acquired land. The reference court did not take into account those two sale-deeds on the ground that nobody connected with the transaction involved in those deeds had been examined as a witness. But the division bench of the High Court expressed that the reference court should have taken into consideration those two sale deeds also for fixing the land value of the acquired land. The High Court took them into consideration and finally reached the conclusion that the value of the acquired land could have been Rs. 75,000/- per acre as on the date of the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act.

7. Smt. K. Amreshwari, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant State contended that the High Court ought not have taken into consideration any of those documents as nobody connected with the transaction mentioned therein had been examined. On the other hand Sri Vidya Sagar, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that Section 51A of the Act is intended to enable the Court to consider the transaction evidenced by the sale deeds. That Section reads thus :

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2001 Supreme(SC) 388

IMPORTANT POINTWhile fixing value of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, certified copies of sale deed of comparable land can be considered without examining persons connected with the transactions mentioned therein.

Cases Referred (4)

IMPORTANT POINT
While fixing value of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, certified copies of sale deed of comparable land can be considered without examining persons connected with the transactions mentioned therein.