The fixation of an arbitrary date for the assessment of compensation for the acquisition of property, which has no rational connection to the value of the property at the time of acquisition, is arbitrary and results in the denial of just and fair compensation, thereby violating the constitutional guarantee under Article 31 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:
Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 - S. 8(3)(b) - Compensation for acquisition of property - Principles - Fixation of date of requisition as date for assessment of compensation - Arbitrary - Prima facie denial of just and fair equivalent - Provision ultra vires.
Fact of the Case:

Petitioner claimed ownership of a piece of land and sought compensation for its acquisition by the Government under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The Government offered compensation at a rate lower than that claimed by the petitioner. An arbitrator was appointed to determine the compensation. The petitioner challenged the provisions of the Act, particularly S. 8(3)(b), which provided for the assessment of compensation based on the price of the property on the date of requisition, arguing that it was arbitrary and resulted in denial of just compensation.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that S. 8(3)(b) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, which provided for the assessment of compensation for the acquisition of property based on the price of the property on the date of requisition, was arbitrary and resulted in the denial of just and fair compensation. The Court found that the fixation of the date of requisition as the date for assessment of compensation was arbitrary and had no rational connection with the value of the property at the time of acquisition. The Court also held that the provision that the compensation payable should be the lesser of the amount determined under clause (a) or clause (b) of S. 8(3) indicated that the law was not awarding just and fair compensation.
Issues: 1. Whether the fixation of the date of requisition as the date for assessment of compensation under S. 8(3)(b) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, was arbitrary and resulted in the denial of just and fair compensation? 2. Whether the provision that the compensation payable should be the lesser of the amount determined under clause (a) or clause (b) of S. 8(3) indicated that the law was not awarding just and fair compensation?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the fixation of the date of requisition as the date for assessment of compensation under S. 8(3)(b) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, was arbitrary and resulted in the denial of just and fair compensation. The Court reasoned that the date of requisition was not rationally connected to the value of the property at the time of acquisition and that the provision left the State free to acquire property at any time it chose, resulting in a prima facie denial of just and fair compensation. 2. The Court held that the provision that the compensation payable should be the lesser of the amount determined under clause (a) or clause (b) of S. 8(3) indicated that the law was not awarding just and fair compensation. The Court reasoned that the provision ensured that the citizen would receive the lesser of the two amounts, which showed that the law was not intended to provide just and fair compensation.
Final Decision: The Court declared S. 8(3)(b) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, to be ultra vires and void, holding that it violated the constitutional guarantee of just and fair compensation under Article 31 of the Constitution of India.

judgment-

Kotval, J.

(1) The petitioner claims to be the owner of a piece of land and measuring 2 Gunthas 5 annas, out of S. No. 29A at Juhu. The land originally belonged to her husband, and after his death she claim to have succeeded to it be virtue of a will. The respondents have not admitted her title but the questions is hardly material of the points raised in the present petition.

(2) On 2nd May 1942, this piece of land was requisitioned for a purposes of the Union under R. 75A (1) of the then existing Defense of India Rules. The notifications (Ex.1) stated that it was required for military purposes, and it has down now been explained that it was required by for the constructions of a road leadings to the military aerodrome at juhu during the to period of the emergency occasioned by the last war. The owner of the plot was receiving the usual compensation for requisitioning until 29-12-1952, when a notifications was issued under S. 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquistion of Immovable property Act 1952, (XXX of 1952). That Act had been enacted by the parliament on the 14th March 1952, and by virtue of S. 24 thereof, it replaced several enactment under which were passed after the operation of Defense of India Rules expired. The notification under S. 7 of the Act said that area at one time was which had been requisitioned and 2nd May 1942, was now being acquired by the government of India from the date of the notifications of under S. 7 and the notifications itself so declared the land to have vested in the central Government.

(3) Consequent upon this notifications the only right which the owner of the land had, was to claim compensation, and accordingly, compensation was offered by the collector of Bombay the second respondents to the petition, by his latter dated 20th February 1961 at the rate of Rs.11 per sq. Vd. According to this valuation, the petitioner would have got Rs. 3080 for the land. The petitioner however wanted compensation for the land at a much higher rate. She claimed by it at the ate of Rs, 100 per sq. Yd., which would give her an amount of Rs,........... plus the usual 15 per cent solarium for compulsory, Acquistion since there were an agreement, the chief Judge court in the small causes Bombay Mr. T.B. Desai who is the first respondents the to this petition, was appointed the arbitrator under S. 7. The Arbiter gave notice to the petitioners of put in her claim, and also to the third respondents, the Government, of India to the petitioners at the rate of Rs,. 75 per sq. Yard, acquisition and the state offered I it statements compensation at the rate of Rs 11 per sq. Yd., which according to the said Act."". the third respondents also denied the petitioners claims for the 15 per solarium for compulsory Acquisition. Before the matter could proceed much further before the Arbitrator., the petitioners preferred before the present Miscellaneous petition in the this court on 18th September, 1962.

(4) In this petition, the petitioners challenges these provisions of Requisitioning and Acquistion of the Immovable property Act, 1952, where by the compensation is to be assessed. We will first refer to the provisions of the Act and the then indicate the precise nature of the objections and the question raised in the present petition.

(5) Act XXX of 1952 enacted to provide for the requisitioning and Acquisition of the immovable and Acquisition of property for the purposes of the union, and it was brought into force of a limited duration. By an amendments to S. 1 made by another central Act No. 48 of 1963 the act was to ceases to have effect on the 14th day of March 1970 with the certain exceptions be done in the past. Section 3 deals with the power to requisition immovable property and S, 4 prescribes that consequent upon requisitioning the competent authority may take possession of the property by such forces as may be necessary after requiring the owner to may be deliver possession of notice served on him. Section 4 confers

Click Here to Read the rest of this document