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

2021 Supreme(SC) 1086

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HEMANT GUPTA, V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.
Shankarrao Bhagwantrao Patil Etc. - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos.5712-5713 of 2021 (Arising Out Of Slp (Civil) Nos. 33471-33472 of 2016) With Civil Appeal Nos. 5714-5715 of 2021 (Arising Out Of Slp (Civil) Nos. 33876-33877 of 2016)
Decided on : 20-09-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appelant : Mr. Atul Babasaheb Dakh, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 142 –Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 4, 18 – Compensation – First Appeals – Civil Appeals – Enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court and unless as to discovery, etc – Appeals are directed against order 016 passed by High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad in First Appeals filed by land owners and State determining compensation of land acquired at rate of apart from statutory benefits, thus reducing compensation awarded by learned Reference Court at rate – Held, Court find that order of learned Reference Court is justified in law whereas the High Court has reduced compensation drastically without any reasonable basis – Therefore, court find that appellant is entitled to a compensation square feet from date of award by Land Acquisition Collector – Apart from statutory benefits, such compensation has been arrived at keeping in view development activity that has already taken place by virtue of possession of acquired land delivered to State – Possession of land acquired was taken – Land owners have claimed interest when possession was taken, whereas acquisition is in year 1999 – In respect of argument for determination of amount of compensation from date possession was taken by State till date of notification under Section 4 of Act, judgments relied upon by appellant have been referred to in para 8 above – A perusal of said judgments shows that grant of payment of interest for pre-acquisition period is in nature of an order passed under Article 142 of Constitution to do substantial justice – Keeping in view aforesaid judgments, court find that instead of remitting matter to Land Acquisition Collector for determination of compensation for use and occupation by State, court deem it appropriate to decide this issue in present appeal itself – Appeals disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

1. The present appeals are directed against the order dated 22.03.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad in the First Appeals filed by the land owners and the State determining the compensation of the land acquired at the rate of Rs.317/-per square meter (29 per square feet) apart from the statutory benefits, thus reducing the compensation awarded by the learned Reference Court on 13.08.2003 at the rate of Rs. 70 per square feet.

2. The land of the appellants measuring 40R (1R = 100 square meters or 1089 square feet) comprising of a land survey no. 220/4/b was taken into possession by the State through private negotiations on 14.09.1984. The market price payable to the landowners was to be settled by negotiations but, since the price could not be decided, therefore the land comprising land survey no. 220/4/b admeasuring 40R was intended to be acquired vide notification dated 04.02.1999 under Section 4 of The Land Acquisition Act, 18941[For short the ‘Act’] published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette. Such land is the subject matter of Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 33471-33472 of 2016. The State also intended to acquire land admeasuring 30R and 20R comprising of Survey Number 212/b and 220/4 vide the above said notification as well. The possession of such land was taken on 21.10.1992. Such land is the subject matter of Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos.33876-33877 of 2016. The other statutory requirements were completed and two separate awards were announced. The learned Special Land Acquisition Collector determined market value considering the two sale instances both dated 24.04.1997 forming a part of the land comprising of Survey No. 220 of an area of 92 square meters sold for a sum of Rs. 3500/-. The first award was announced on 26.03.2002 in respect of the land admeasuring 40R. The learned Special Land Acquisition Collector awarded a sum of Rs.232/-per square meter. The second award was announced by the Land Acquisition Collector on 6.4.2002 awarding a compensation of Rs.217/-per square meter for 1390 square meters of land out of Survey No. 220/4 and Rs.168/-per square meters comprising of Survey No. 212/1/b, whereas in respect of the land admeasuring 100 square meters out of Survey No. 212/1/b, a compensation of Rs. 179/- per square meter was granted.

3. The land owners dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 150/-per square feet for the entire land measuring 90R. It has also come on record that the land, subject matter of the appeals, is similarly situated and forms a part of Bhoom Municipal Council. The population of Bhoom Municipal Council is 17510 and the land is described in the revenue record as barren land. PW 1 – Shankarrao had admitted that the land was rocky and moorum(powdered rock) soil.

4. The land owners relied upon two sale deeds, i.e. Exhibit 30 dated 05.04.1995 whereby the land falling under Survey No. 220 was sold for a sum of Rs. 3,00,051/-in pursuance of an agreement to sell dated 02.11.1994. A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-was to be paid before 1.11.1995. The Reference Court calculated the rate of the sale price, it was recorded to be Rs. 137.76 per square feet. The rate has not been disputed before the High Court or even before this Court. The land owners relied upon another sale deed i.e. Exhibit 31 dated 04.09.1996 whereby the land measuring 49.5 x 16.5 feet (816. 75 square feet) was sold for a sum of Rs.1,90,000/-that is Rs. 232.50 per square feet. Such property is described as Municipal Council New Property Number 1480 and 1480/1. The learned Reference Court arrived at the compensation of Rs.70/-per square feet of the land acquired after deducting 20% of the price mentioned in Exhibit 30 and 31 on account of development charges.

5. However, the High Court in further appeals filed by the State and the land owners dismissed the appeal of t

    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