1. Compulsory acquisition of land for road widening under the Land Acquisition Ordinance and Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance — dispute over valuation of land within street lines. (Para 7 , 8 )
Back
Next 
1947 Supreme(SC) 3
Privy Council At Ceylon at Colombo
Sir John Beaumont, Sir Madhavan Nair , Uthwatt, Porter , Justice Lords Wright, JJ.
Municipal Council of Colombo -Appellant
Versus
Kuna Mana Navanna Suna Pana, Letchiman Chettiar -Resopndent
Privy Council Appeal No. 25 of 1946
Decided On : 28-01-1947
Advocates Appeared:
Hy. S. L. Polak and Co., Burchells, J. Chintta Durai, T.B.W. Ramsay , C.S. Rewcastle, R.K. Handoo, L.M.D. de Silva, D.N. Pritt
Hy. S. L. Polak and Co., Burchells, J. Chintta Durai, T.B.W. Ramsay , C.S. Rewcastle, R.K. Handoo, L.M.D. de Silva, D.N. Pritt
Important Points
Market value for land acquisition is the price a willing purchaser would pay in the open market, regardless of the owner's adjacent holdings. Land within statutory street lines cannot be valued as building land; any resulting loss must be proven as injurious affection to the remaining property.
Subject
Property Law - Land Acquisition and Compensation
Act Referred
Land Acquisition Ordinance: S.3, S.5, S.6, S.7, S.8, S.11, S.21, S.22, S.26
Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance: S.5, S.7, S.19, S.19(1), S.19(4), S.108, R.8
Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance: S.5, S.7, S.19, S.19(1), S.19(4), S.108, R.8
Headnote
(A) Land Acquisition Ordinance - Section 21 - Market Value - Compensation - Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance - Sections 5, 7, 108 - Building restrictions within street lines - Determination of compensation for a small strip of land - Market value is the price which a willing vendor might be expected to obtain in the open market from a willing purchaser - The fact that the vendor owns other land in the neighbourhood is irrelevant for the purpose of ascertaining the market value of the land to be acquired, although such fact may form the basis of a claim for damage for severance or injurious affection under Section 21(b) and (c) (Para 17) - Land situated between defined street lines cannot be valued as building land as statutory restrictions ensure that no purchaser would buy such land with a view to building upon it (Para 20).
(B) Compensation - Injurious affection - Any claim for compensation based on the loss of building value in an acquired strip must be made under the heads of severance or injurious affection to the other property of the owner under Section 21(b) or (c) of the Land Acquisition Ordinance, and must be supported by evidence that the acquisition has prejudiced the development of the remaining land (Para 20, 21).
Facts of the case:
A local authority defined street lines to secure a uniform width for a road and compulsorily acquired a strip of land from a larger estate. The owner challenged the compensation, contending that the acquired strip should be valued as first-class building land. The lower appellate court had increased the compensation by applying a principle that a small strip of land should be valued by ascertaining the market value of the entire estate and assigning a proportionate value to the acquired portion.
Findings of Court:
The method of valuing the acquired strip as a proportion of the larger estate is incorrect as it attempts to ascertain the loss sustained by the owner rather than the market value of the strip itself. Furthermore, the land within street lines cannot be treated as building land due to statutory prohibitions on erecting buildings in such areas. There was no evidence to prove that the acquisition caused actual injurious affection to the development of the remaining estate.
Issues: Whether the market value of an acquired strip of land should be determined as a proportion of the value of the larger estate to which it belongs, and whether land within defined street lines can be valued as building land.
Ratio Decidendi: Market value must be determined based on what a willing purchaser would pay in the open market, independent of the owner's ownership of adjacent land. Statutory restrictions on building within street lines preclude such land from being valued as building land. Any loss resulting from these restrictions must be claimed as injurious affection to the remaining property and proven by evidence of actual prejudice to the development of that property.
Result: Appeal allowed.
(B) Compensation - Injurious affection - Any claim for compensation based on the loss of building value in an acquired strip must be made under the heads of severance or injurious affection to the other property of the owner under Section 21(b) or (c) of the Land Acquisition Ordinance, and must be supported by evidence that the acquisition has prejudiced the development of the remaining land (Para 20, 21).
Facts of the case:
A local authority defined street lines to secure a uniform width for a road and compulsorily acquired a strip of land from a larger estate. The owner challenged the compensation, contending that the acquired strip should be valued as first-class building land. The lower appellate court had increased the compensation by applying a principle that a small strip of land should be valued by ascertaining the market value of the entire estate and assigning a proportionate value to the acquired portion.
Findings of Court:
The method of valuing the acquired strip as a proportion of the larger estate is incorrect as it attempts to ascertain the loss sustained by the owner rather than the market value of the strip itself. Furthermore, the land within street lines cannot be treated as building land due to statutory prohibitions on erecting buildings in such areas. There was no evidence to prove that the acquisition caused actual injurious affection to the development of the remaining estate.
Issues: Whether the market value of an acquired strip of land should be determined as a proportion of the value of the larger estate to which it belongs, and whether land within defined street lines can be valued as building land.
Ratio Decidendi: Market value must be determined based on what a willing purchaser would pay in the open market, independent of the owner's ownership of adjacent land. Statutory restrictions on building within street lines preclude such land from being valued as building land. Any loss resulting from these restrictions must be claimed as injurious affection to the remaining property and proven by evidence of actual prejudice to the development of that property.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
Sir John Beaumont:-
[1] This appeal from a decree dated 17-12-1942, of the Supreme Court of the Island of Ceylon, raises certain questions as to the construction and effect of the Land Acquisition Ordinance (chap. 203, Legislative Enactments of Ceylon) and of the Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance (chap. 199, Legislative Enactments of Ceylon) and it will be convenient at the outset to refer to the material provisions of these enactments.
[2] By the Land Acquisition Ordinance it is provided, so far as material, by S. 3 that whenever it shall appear to the Governor that land in any locality is likely to be needed for any public purpose it shall be lawful for the Governor to direct the Surveyor-General to examine such land and report whether the same is fitted for such purpose. By S. 5 the Surveyor-General is required to make his report and upon receipt thereof the Governor may direct the Government Agent to take order for the acquisition of the land. By S. 6 the Government Agent is required to give notice that the Government proposes to take possession of the land, and that claims to compensation from all interested in such land may be made to him. By S. 7 the Government Agent is required on the day fixed for the enquiry to enquire summarily into the value of the land, and to determine the amount of compensation which, in his opinion, should be allowed therefore, and to tender such amount to the persons interested who have attended the enquiry, Section 8 provides that in determining the amount of compensation the Government Agent shall take into consideration the matters mentioned in S. 21, and shall not take into consideration any of the matters mentioned in S. 22. Section 11 provides, so far as material, that when the Government Agent proceeds to make enquiry as aforesaid if he is unable to agree with the persons interested as to the amount of compensation to be allowed be shall refer the matter to the determination of the District Court in manner thereinafter appearing. A later section provides that the reference to the District Court shall be heard by the District Judge and two assessors and, if the assessors do not agree, the opinion of the Judge is to prevail. Section 21 is in these terms:
"In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under this Ordinance, the District Judge and assessors shall take into consideration:
(a) firstly, the market value at the time of awarding compensation for such land;
(b) secondly, the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at the time of awarding compensation, by reason of severing such land from his own land:
(c) thirdly, the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at the time of awarding compensation, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other property, whether movable or immovable, in any other manner, or his earnings; and
(d) fourthly, if in consequence of the acquisition he is compelled to change his residence, the reasonable expenses, if any, incidental to such, change."
[3] Section 22 directs that the Judge or Assessors shall not take into consideration the matters enumerated under seven heads. The only one which may be regarded as relevant to the present appeal is the sixth: "Any increase to the value of the other land of the person interested likely to accrue from the use to which the land acquired will be put." Section 26 provides that if the Government Agent or any person interested is dissatisfied with any award made by the Court under the provisions of the Ordinance, he may appeal therefrom to the Supreme Court.
[4] By the Housing and Town Improvements Ordinance it is provided bo far as material:
Section 5 : that no person shall erect or re-erect any building within the limits administered by a local authority except in accordance with plans, drawings and specifications approved in writing by the Chairman. Section 7 : that (1) The Chairman shall not-
(a) approve any plan or specification of any building; or
(b
