SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 190

2002(1) Supreme 524
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Gujarat High Court)
V. N. Khare and Ashok Bhan, JJ.
Kashiben Bhikabai & Ors. -Appellants
versus
Special Land Acquisition Officer & Anr. -Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 5354-89 of 1993
Decided on 6-2-2002
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appearing Parties : S.K. Dholakia, Jitendra Sharma, Senior Advocates, E.R. Kumar, D.P. Mohanty, Ms. Yugandhara Jha, P.H. Parekh, S.C. Patel, Ms. H. Wahi, Kanubhai V. Patel, P. Gaur, Ms. Minakshi Vij and P.N. Jha, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Appellants would not be entitled to the additional compensation provided u/s. 23(1A) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The compensation is enhanced by Rs. 0.12 paise per sq.ft. on the evidence of sale instances.

Headnote:(i) Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Acquisition of land for Gujarat Housing Board-Reference Court granted compensation @ 3.71 sq.ft.-High Court reduced it to 1.88 per sq.ft.-Fair compensation payable to claimants-Three instances of sale-High Court accepting second instance-Whether needs modification-(Yes) (see paras 13 to 16) -Compensation raised to Rs. 2.00 per sq.ft.-Whether claimants are entitled to solatium @ 30% u/s. 23(2) of the Act? (Yes)-Whether claimants are entitled to additional compensation @ 12% as provided u/s. 23(1A) of the Act? (No)-Appeals partly allowed. (Paras 16 & 17)

       (ii) Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Claimants entered into agreement with ALC that compensation payable over and above Rs. 1.35 sq.ft be paid to ALC-Suit pending-22 claimants asking for separating their interest.

       Held : The 22 claimants-appellants who have asked for separating their interest did not contest the right of the ALC to get the higher amount of compensation as per agreement either before the reference court or before the High Court. No material has been placed before us to record a finding to the contrary. Keeping these facts in view, we direct that the enhanced amount be paid to the ALC, reserving the rights that the claimants to recover the same from the ALC, if permissible in law, on taking recourse to an appropriate proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction, in accordance with law. (Para 18)

       

JUDGMENT

Bhan, J.-Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat in reducing the compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and claiming more, fair and equitable compensation for the acquired land the claimants have come up in these appeals.

2. On 15th May, 1974 State of Gujarat issued a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) for acquisition of 78 hectares, 32 acres and 54 sq. meters of land in Village Gorva, which is situated within the limits of the Municipal Corporation of Baroda, Gujarat, for the Gujarat Housing Board. It was published in the official Gazette on 8th August, 1974. Notification under section 6 of the Act was issued on 12th July, 1977 and was published in the Gazette on 21st July, 1977.

3. There were 94 claimants whose land was notified for acquisition under the aforesaid notifications. They claimed compensation @ Rs. 4/- per sq.ft. before the Land Acquisition Officer (for short the LAO ).

4. The land owners entered into an agreement with Arun Land Corporation (for short the ALC ), 36th appellant in the instant appeals. This agreement reads, inter alia, as under:

(a) By virtue of these powers, the partners of Arun Land Corporation can give suitable replies, give/cause to give writings on behalf of us and to complete this matter of acquisition and we all agree to it with our consent.

(b) It is the responsibility of this Corporation to award us the price of this land at the rate of Rs. 1.35 per sq.ft.

(c) If Gujarat Housing Board awards any amount in excess of the above and if Arun Land Corporation receives such excess amount, we, the farmers do not have any kind of objection therein and we assign all such rights to this Corporation."

5. The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award on 10th October, 1980. He divided the land into four categories, viz., A, B, C and D and determined the compensation as under:

Category Amount in Rupees

A 0.93 per sq. ft. (Rs.1 lakh per hectare)

B 1.21 per sq.ft. (Rs. 1.30 lakh per hectare)

C 1.40 per sq.ft. (Rs. 1.50 lakh per hectare)

 D 1.58 per sq.ft. (Rs.1.70 lakh per hectare)

6. Out of the total number of 94 claimants, 42 claimants refused to abide by the agreement. ALC filed a suit being Suit No. 156 of 1980 against them in the Civil Court, Nadiad, which restrained the Land Acquisition Officer from disbursing to these 42 claimants the amounts payable under the Award. An appeal was filed by the said 42 claimants to the High Court. The High Court permitted them to withdraw only Rs.1.35 per sq.ft. from the award amount and the amount awarded in excess of Rs.1.35 per sq.ft. was directed not to be released till the disposal of the suit filed by the ALC. The said suit is still pending. Except for 7 claimants, the rest of the 42 claimants, who had challenged the agreement dated 16.12.1978 have settled the matter with the ALC. The pending suit is relateable to the 7 claimants only.

7. Each of the 35 claimants who are before us abided by the agreement dated 16.12.1978 and received payment @ Rs.1.35 per sq.ft. between 10th October, 1980 to 30th November, 1980. As the claimants, including those before us, were aggrieved by the award, reference was made under Section 18 of the Act to the Court. In each reference the ALC was claimant No. 2. In the Land Reference applications, each of the claimants admitted that each of them had executed the agreement dated 16.12.1978 in favour of the ALC. Similarly, the each of the claimants deposed before the Reference Court that they executed the agreement dated 16.12.1978 with the ALC and abide by the same.

8. By a judgment and order dated 11th September, 1987 the Extra Assistant Judge (hereinafter referred to "the Reference Court") held that the Special Land Acquisition Officer had erroneously



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top