IMPORTANT POINT
Deduction for development and civic amenities depends upon stage of development in the area and proximity to municipal areas etc.

Judgment :-

Dalveer Bhandari, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore dated 16.3.2000 in Miscellaneous First Appeal (for short, M.F.A.) No. 3232 of 1996.

2. The facts in nutshell are as follows:

The preliminary notification was issued on 13.8.1981 to acquire 4 acres and 27 guntas of land belonging to the appellant situated in Survey Nos. 129/1, 129/3, 129/4 and 129/74 situated in Taj Sultanpur, Gulbarga City in Karnataka. The award was passed on 30.6.1986 awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per acre.

3. The Reference Court by its judgment and award dated 8.4.1996 determined the market value at the rate of Rs.19,500/- per acre.

4. The appellant aggrieved by the said judgment preferred M.F.A. No. 3232 of 1996 before the High Court. The appellant placed reliance on the judgments and awards passed in M.F.A. No. 3738 of 1995 dated 20.1.1998 and M.F.A. No. 2557 of 1997 dated 27.1.1998, wherein the market value of the lands located at almost the same distance from Gulbarga city and is having same potentiality of development. The appellant also produced notification dated 30.10.1965 to show that the Taj Sultanpur village was declared to be within the municipal limits of Gulbarga city of Karnataka.

5. The High Court dismissed the appeal without considering the main submission of the appellant that the acquired lands are within the municipal limits of Gulbarga city and the deduction at the rate of 53% towards the development charges is excessive and not in consonance with the law laid down by the Full Bench of the High Court and by this Court.

6. In the present appeal, the appellant is aggrieved by the deduction at the rate of 53% towards development charges. In the present case, the following questions of law formulated by the appellant are reproduced as under:-

"A. Whether the High Court has committed a serious error in deducting 53% towards development charges in the facts and circumstances of the case?

B. Whether the High Court has committed a serious error in not appreciating that the acquired lands come within the Municipal limits of the city of Gulbarga and therefore the development charges cannot be more than 33-1/3%?

C. Whether the decision of Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court is binding on the learned Judge passing the impugned judgment?

D. Whether the High Court has failed to appreciate that the judgment in other appeals is applicable as it has the same potentiality?

E. Whether the High Court has failed to take note of the other evidences produced by the appellant such as valuers evidence?"

7. During the course of hearing, the parties have focused the entire argument as to whether deduction at the rate of 53% was in consonance with law or not? The appellant placed reliance on the judgment of this court in K.S. Shivadevamma & Others v. Assistant Commissioner & Land Acquisition Officer & Another (1996) 2 SCC 62. In para 10 of the judgment, this Court accepted the argument that 53% deduction is not automatic but depends upon the nature of the development and the stage of development, meaning thereby that it would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. In this case, this court has further observed as under:-

"This court has laid as a general rule that for laying the roads and other amenities 33-1/3% is required to be deducted. Where the development has already taken place, appropriate deduction needs to be made."

8. This Court in Kasturi & Others v. State of Haryana (2003) 1 SCC 354 has extensively dealt with this aspect and observed in para 7 as under:

"..... It is well settled that in respect of agricultural land or undeveloped land which has potential value for housing or commercial purposes, normally 1/3rd amount of compensation has to be deducted out of the amount of compensation payable on the acquired land subject to certain variations depending on its nature, location, extent of expenditure involved for development and the area required