Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : S.V.MARUTHI, V.BHASKARA RAO
Land Acquisition Officer, Sub Collector, Vijayawada - Appellant
Versus
Sheik Bahileem - Respondent
Decided On : 03-31-95
LAND ACQUISITION - COMPENSATION - MARKET VALUE - DEDUCTION FOR DEVELOPMENT COSTS - RES JUDICATA - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
Land was acquired for providing house-sites to weaker sections. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs. 34,200 per acre, while the claimants sought Rs. 2,00,000 per acre. The Civil Court enhanced compensation to Rs. 1,52,875 per acre. The Land Acquisition Officer appealed against the judgment.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the sale of a small extent of land under Ex. A-1 was genuine and could be relied upon for fixation of market value, subject to deductions for development costs. The Court also held that the judgments in three other appeals arising out of the same notification, which were dismissed by a learned single Judge and became final, did not operate as res judicata in the present case as the claimants were different.
Issues: 1. Whether the sale under Ex. A-1 was genuine or not. 2. Whether the sale-deed, Ex. A-1, under which a small extent of 573 sq. yards of land was sold can be taken into consideration at all. 3. What is the deduction that has to be made for the purpose of converting the land as house-sites so that the value of the house-sites would be on par with that of the market value mentioned in Ex. A-1. 4. Whether the judgments dismissing the three appeals - A. S. Nos. 2801 / 81, 2721/81 and 2508/82 filed by the Land Acquisition Officer which arose out of the same notification operate as res judicata or not.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court relied on the judgment in Administrator General of W. B. v. Collector, Varanasi, AIR 1988 SC 943, which held that the price fetched for small plots cannot form safe bases for valuation of large tracts and the prices fetched for small developed plots not be directly adopted in valuing large extents except, however, after making necessary deductions for development expenses. 2. The Court held that the sale-deed, Ex. A-1, under which a small extent of 573 sq. yards of land was sold can be taken into consideration for fixation of market value, subject to deductions for development costs. 3. The Court held that a deduction of one third of the amount from Rs. 1,52,875.00 per acre was appropriate to account for development costs. 4. The Court held that the judgments in the other three appeals did not operate as res judicata in the present case as the claimants were different.
Final Decision: The Court partly allowed the Land Acquisition Officer's appeal and the appeal suit. The market value of the acquired lands was fixed at Rs. 1,02,000 per acre after deducting one third of the amount from Rs. 1,52,875.00 per acre. The claimants were also entitled to 30% solatium and interest at the rate of 15% as per the provisions of the Amended Act.
( 1 ) THE lands in question comprised in an extent of acres 5. 00 in R. S. No. 45/1 and acres 1-071/2 cents in R. S. Nos. 45/ 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Bhavanipuram village, Vijayawada were acquired for providing house-Sites to the weaker sections. The notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 5-1-1979. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting enquiry, passed an award on 26-3-1981 fixing compensation at Rs. 34,200. 00 per acre. The claimants being not satisfied with the said compensation sought reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The claimants claimed compensation at Rs. 2,00,000. 00 per acre. On reference, the cases are numbered as O. P. Nos. 264, 265, 267, 266 and 263 of 1981. The Civil Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, and after hearing the arguments of both the sides, enhanced compensation to Rs. 1,52,875. 00 per acre. Assailing those judgments the Land Acquisition Officer preferred appeals - A. S. Nos. 2801 / 82, 2721/81, 2508/82, 506/83 and 3379/81 Except A. S. No. 506/83 all the other appeals were dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court vide order dated 23-11-1988 confirming the judgments of the Civil Court. Against the judgment in A. S. No. 3379/88 the present L. P. A. No. 71/80 was filed by the Land Acquisition Officer. As A. S. No. 506/83 is not disposed of, it is also posted along with the present Letters Patent Appeal. Therefore, both these are disposed of by this common judgment as the lands in both the cases were acquired by a single notification.
( 2 ) THE learned Government Pleader appearing for the Land Acquisition Officer contended that the enhancement of the compensation made by the Civil Court is too excessive; the lower Court erred in relying on a sale deed, Ex. A-1, dated 5-5-1978, which was in respect of a small extent of land of 573 sq. yards; the land under Ex. A-1 was sold for a consideration of Rs. 18,000. 00 which comes to Rs. 1,52,875. 00 per acre; the lower Court ought not to have relied on a sale-deed which was in respect of a very small extent of land except when there is no other documentary evidence on record to show the market value of the land. He further contended that when there is no evidence on record, the Civil Court has to confirm the award; but the Civil Court erred in enhancing compensation; therefore, the present Letters Patent Appeal and the Appeal suit were filed. It is further contended that the acquired lands were agricultural lands and were not fit for sale as house-sites and that therefore fixation of market value basing on Ex. A-1 is not correct. It is further contended that the lower court erred in not deducting anything towards expenses for development when the acquired land is undeveloped agricultural land particularly when a sale-deed of small plot is relied on.
( 3 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the claimants contended that the village Bhavanipuram is just adjacent to the Vijayawada municipal area and the same was also included in the municipal area on 20-8-1981; therefore, the compensation awarded is too meager compared to the market value of the land prevailing in that area. It is further contended that the appeals filed against the judgments of the Civil Court awarding the same compensation in respect of similar lands which were acquired under the same notification were already dismissed and became final and, therefore, those judgments would operate as res judicata and the present appeals have to be dismissed as the same cannot be proceeded with.
( 4 ) IN view of the abovesaid contentions the main point that arises for decision is what is the proper market value to be paid as compensation for the acquired lands.
( 5 ) TO decide what is the proper market value to be paid to the claimants, the following points arise for consideration in these appeals. (1) Whether the sale under Ex. A-1 is a genuine sale or not:in respect of A. S. No.
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
