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

2022 Supreme(SC) 351

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. SHAH, B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
Ramrao Shankar Tapase – Appellant
Versus
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2732, 2733-2734, 2735-2736, 2737-2738, 2739, 2740-2741, 2742-2743, 2744, 2745, 2746-2747 of 2022, SLP (Civil) Nos. 6308, 6309-6310 of 2022, Diary No. 8900 of 2021, 36320 of 2019
Decided On : 19-04-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Rajat Joseph, AOR Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Satyakam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Mr. Shakul R. Ghatole, Adv. Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, AOR Ms. Prapti Allagh, Adv. Mr. K. Krishna Kumar, AOR Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Gagan Sanghi, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR

The determination of fair market value for compensation in land acquisition cases should consider the actual market value of the acquired land, irrespective of the purpose of acquisition or future use.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition - Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 - Section 32(2) - Summary of Acts and Sections

Fact of the Case:

The appeals arose from land acquisition proceedings by the State Government for the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) for the extension of an industrial estate in village Bhoyar, Taluka and District Yavatmal. The original claimants sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Reference Court, which was partly allowed by the High Court. The claimants appealed the High Court's decision.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court determined and awarded different amounts of compensation for different lands situated at different locations in the same village. The court relied on sale deeds and considered the non-agricultural potentiality and location of the acquired land. The court modified the compensation awarded by the Reference Court based on the sale deed at Ex.41, adding 10% towards the price rise/escalation and 15% towards potentiality and location of the acquired land.

Issues: The main issues were the determination of fair market value for compensation, the relevance of the purpose of acquisition, and the uniformity of compensation for lands acquired for a common purpose.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the purpose of acquisition and future use of the acquired land cannot be the main criteria to determine compensation. It also emphasized that different lands in the same village may command different market values. The court relied on the sale deed at Ex.41 and added 10% cumulative increase per year for three years to determine fair market value.

Final Decision: The appeals were partly allowed, and the compensation was modified based on the sale deed at Ex.41, adding 12% cumulative increase per year for three years. The claimants were entitled to compensation at the modified rates, with no interest for delayed appeals.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. As common questions of law and facts arise in this group of appeals from the same land acquisition proceedings, all these appeals are decided and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. All these appeals arise from the land acquisition proceedings undertaken by the State Government for the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Acquiring Body’) for extension of industrial estate in village Bhoyar, Taluka and District Yavatmal. The State Government issued a notification on 09.03.1995 under Section 32(2) of the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) for acquisition of the lands in question pertaining to village Bhoyar. By the said notification, several extents of land located in various survey numbers spread out in the village of Bhoyar, belonging to the original claimants, were acquired. The Special Land Acquisition Officer declared the awards and determined the quantum of compensation payable to the original claimants, particulars of which are given herein-below. The original claimants preferred reference applications under Section 34 of the Act, read with Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 before the Reference Court seeking enhancement of compensation. The Reference Court enhanced the amount of compensation. Against the common judgment and award passed by the Reference Court both, the original claimants as well as the acquiring body preferred appeals before the High Court. The original claimants preferred the appeals for enhancement of compensation. By the impugned common judgment and order, the High Court has disposed of all the appeals and cross objections and has partly allowed the appeals preferred by the acquiring body and has reduced the amount of compensation determined and awarded by the Reference Court as under. Hence, the original claimants have preferred the present appeals.

3. The factual aspects in case of each claimant and the appeals are as under:

Civil Appeal No. 2732/2022 and SLP (C) No. 23250/2018

The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in First Appeal No. 133/2007. Land admeasuring 4.91 Hectares in Survey No. 31/2 in village Bhoyar came to be acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award dated 27.11.1997 and determined the compensation at Rs. 50,000/- per Hectare for 4.23 Hectares of cultivable land and Rs. 1,500/- per Hectare for 0.68 hectare of uncultivable land. Rs. 24,400/- was awarded for the well. At the instance of the claimants, a reference was made to the Reference Court, which was numbered as L.A.C. No. 213/1999. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 3,75,000/- per hectare. The acquiring body-MIDC preferred the appeal before the High Court, being First Appeal No. 133/2007. Relying upon and considering the sale deed produced at Ex.41 dated 18.09.1992 with respect to the land bearing Survey No. 20/2 in village Bhoyar itself and considering the potentiality of the acquired land and considering the time gap between the said notification dated 18.09.1992 and the present notification dated 9.3.1995 and considering the time gap of approximately three years, adding 10% towards the price rise/escalation and adding further 15% towards the potentiality and the location of the acquired land, the High Court, by the impugned judgment and order, has determined the compensation at Rs. 1,50,000/- per hectare. Hence, the original claimant has preferred the present appeal.

Civil Appeal Nos. 2746-2747/2022 and SLP (C) Nos. 6309-6310/2022, D. No. 8900/2021

Land admeasuring 2.43 Hectares in Survey No. 33/2 in village Bhoyar came to be acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award and determined the compensation at Rs. 1,500/- per hectare. The Reference Court enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs. 4,

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