Back
2009(6) Supreme 648
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.K. Jain and Asok Kumar Ganguly,JJ.
Charan Dass (Dead) By L. Rs. — Appellants.
versus
Himachal Pradesh Housing and Urban Development Authority & Ors. — Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2213 OF 2001
Decided on 07-09-2009
Market value – Determination of – Deduction of 40% from the market value towards development charges – Validity –. It is well settled that it is not in every case that deduction towards development charges has to be made when a big chunk of land is acquired for housing colonies etc – Where the acquired land falls in the midst of an already developed land with amenities of roads, electricity etc. deduction on this account may not be warranted – At the same time, where all civic and other amenities are to be provided to make it suitable for building purposes or under the local building regulations setting apart of some portion of the lands for providing common facilities is mandatory, an appropriate deduction may be justified – In the instant case having regard to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case, including the location of acquired land, a deduction of 30% towards development charges from the market value of land as arrived by the High Court, would meet the ends of justice – Hence held that the market value of the land for the purpose of payment of compensation to the land owners was to be assessed at Rs.1,05,000/- per Bigha.-Appeals partly allowed.(Paras 19 to 22)
Facts of the Case :
Present Appeals have been filed against order of High Court wherein , while allowing the appeal preferred by the Himachal Pradesh Housing Board , High Court reduced the amount of compensation awarded by District Judge in Reference under Section 18 of Act.
Findings of the Court :
In the instant case Reference Court had relied on Exh. PW2/A and PW2/B to determine the market value of the land.Being the Court of First Appeal, High Court re-evaluated the entire evidence and found that Exh. RW4/A, RW3/A and sale deed marked RX in respect of pieces of the land were the best pieces of evidence to ascertain the market value of the acquired lands.Taking the same as the base and applying the formula of averages, the High Court enhanced the said average amount on account of escalation of the prices and determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,50,000/- per Bigha.In view of lay out plan vis-‘-vis the land in question and bearing in mind the location of the land, subject – matter of the said sale – deeds, held difficult to hold that the exemplars relied upon by the High Court were irrelevant for determining market value of the acquired lands. Location and the date of sale in the cases, relied upon by High Court, were held relevant for determining the market value of the acquired land. Having carefully examined the relevant evidence, held that there was no legal or actual infirmity in the approach of High Court in ascertaining the market value of the lands. Appellants held entitled to compensation at Rs.1,05,000/- per Bigha.and also to Statutory amounts in terms of Section 23(1A) of the Act; solatium at 30% on the market value of the land in accordance with Section 23(2) of the Act and interest as stipulated in Section 28 of the Act.
Result : Appeals partly allowed
JUDGMENT
D.K. Jain, J.
1. This batch of appeals arises from the final judgment and order dated 7th June, 1999 rendered by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in twenty Regular First Appeals as also final judgment and order dated 14th August, 2003 delivered by the said High Court in twelve cognate Regular First Appeals wherein the former order has been relied upon. By the impugned order, while allowing the appeal preferred by the Himachal Pradesh Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as “the Housing Board”), the High Court has reduced the amount of compensation awarded by the District Judge in Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”).
2. Material facts common to all the appeals and relevant for the purpose of disposal of these appeals, are as follows: The State of Himachal Pradesh, respondent No.2 in Civil Appeal No.2213 of 2001, intended to acquire land of the appellants at Shoghi, about 12 K.M. from the capital of the State at Shimla, for construction of a Housing Board Colony. Accordingly, a Notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published in the Himachal Pradesh Gazette on 6th November, 1990. The quality of the lands involved in the acquisition fell in different categories. The Land Acquisition Collector, respondent No.3 herein, by his Award dated 3rd August, 1994 assessed the market value of the acquired land and announced his Award by which compensation at the rate of Rs.32,073/- per Bigha in respect of Bakhal Awal, Rs.24,288/- per Bigha for Bakhal Doem and Rs.7,785/- per Bigha for Ghasani Banjar Kadeem was awarded to the appellants-landowners.
3. Not being satisfied, the appellants filed Reference Applications before the District Judge under Section 18 of the Act claiming compensation at Rs.22,00,000/- per Bigha, inter alia, on the ground that the market value of the acquired land was much more than what was awarded by respondent No.3. Vide his order dated 22nd June, 1996, the District Judge found the evidence adduced by the appellants (Exts.PW2/B and PW2/A) to be reliable. However, he found the exemplars filed by the Housing Board (RW3/A and RX), to be irrelevant for ascertaining the market value of the lands. Accordingly, he determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs.2 lakh per Bigha for all kinds of lands irrespective of their quality and classification. In addition thereto, the District Judge awarded Statutory interest and solatium to the appellants. Similarly, vide his order dated 22nd March, 1997, the District Judge again found the evidence adduced by the appellants in the form of two sale deeds to be reliable. Accordingly, relying on his earlier order dated 22nd June, 1996 (Ex.PZ), he awarded the same compensation to the appellants.
4. Being aggrieved with the amount of compensation determined by the District Judge, the Housing Board preferred Regular First Appeals to the High Court under Section 54 of the Act, praying for setting aside the judgments of the District Judge dated 22nd June, 1996 and 22nd March, 1997. The challenge to the said judgments was on diverse grounds, including that the two sale deeds relied upon by the District Judge pertained to two very small pieces of land having a double storied shop; one sale instance was in respect of one biswa of land sold four months after Notification under Section 4 in the present case; the evidence of Gursaran, one of the claimants, who had appeared to prove the sale deed in respect of the land with a double storied shop lacked truthfulness and in some references the compensation awarded was in excess of the land owned by the claimants.
5. Vide order dated 7th June, 1999, the High Court accepted the appeals filed by the Housing Board. Relying on the decisions of this Court in Special Tehsildar Land Acquisition, Vishakapatnam Vs. A. Mangala Gowri (Smt.) 1 (1991) 4 SCC 218 : AIR 1992 SC 666, Special Deputy Collector & Anr. Vs. Kurra Sambasiva Rao & Ors.2(1997) 6 SCC 41 and Manipur Tea
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
