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

2008 Supreme(SC) 1150

B.N. AGRAWAL, HARJIT SINGH BEDI, G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.
Bhimasha - Appellants
Versus
Special Land Acquisition Officer and another - Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4742 OF 2008
Decided On: 31-07-2008

The court emphasized the principle that the determination of compensation in land acquisition cases should be based on the market value of the land, and the ends of justice should be met by ensuring appropriate compensation to the affected parties.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition - Compensation - Market Value Determination

Fact of the Case:

The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at a certain rate. The Trial Court awarded compensation at a different rate. On appeal, the High Court determined the market value of the land to be higher but refused to award compensation at that rate due to the appellant's claim at a lower rate.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the High Court should have awarded higher compensation to the appellants based on the market value determined by it, subject to the condition of paying the balance court fee. The impugned judgment was modified, and the market value of the land was enhanced to the higher rate determined by the High Court, subject to the payment of further court fee.

Issues: The main issue was the determination of the market value of the acquired land and the appropriate compensation to be awarded to the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the High Court should have awarded higher compensation based on the market value it determined, and the ends of justice could be met by modifying the impugned order to enhance the market value of the land.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment was modified, and the market value of the land fixed by the High Court was enhanced to the higher rate. The appellant was required to pay the further amount of court fee within two months from the date of intimation received from the High Court.

ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Delay condoned.

3. Leave granted.

4. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.13,100/- per acre for dry land and Rs.1,000/- for phot kharab land. On a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the Trial Court awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.36,200/- per acre. On appeal, the High Court referred to the yield notification and price list issued by the competent authority as also the average price of both the crops in relation to the relevant year and concluded that market price of the land comes to Rs.66,550/- per acre. However, the High Court refused to award compensation at the said rate on the premise that the appellant had claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.58,500/- per acre.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the impugned order the High Court, after taking note of the yield notification issued by the Government and price list notified by the competent authority for crops (both are public documents) concluded that market value of the land is Rs.66,550/- per acre. Therefore, the appellants omission to make appropriate claim before the High Court after paying the requisite court fee cannot be castigated as one lacking bona fide.

6. In our view, the High Court should have, after taking note of, the peculiar facts of the case and the market value determined by it, awarded higher compensation to the appellants subject to the condition of paying the balance court fee. This, having not been done, we feel that ends of justice could be met if the impugned order is suitably modified.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned judgment is modified and the market value of the land fixed by the High Court is enhanced to Rs.66,550/- per acre. This order, however, will be subject to the payment of further amount of court fee to be assessed by the Registry of the High Court. After assessment, the Registry shall intimate the deficit amount of court fee to be payable by the appellant to his counsel, which shall be paid within two months from the date intimation is received by the counsel from the High Court.

8. No costs.

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