High Court Of Delhi
INDER PRASAD - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL 119 of 1979
Decided On : 09/04/1984
LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - SECTION 4, 18, 30, 31 - COMPENSATION - MARKET VALUE - DETERMINATION - SALE DEED - EVIDENCE - LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR - REFERENCE COURT - ASSESSMENT - BASIS - ERROR - WILLING BUYER AND WILLING SELLER CONCEPT - OBJECTIVE TEST - NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES - COMPARABLE PRICES - L. AND D. O. INTIMATION - IRRELEVANT - FEROZSHAH ROAD SALE - RELIABLE GUIDE - ENHANCED COMPENSATION - APPORTIONMENT - LAND OWNER AND L. AND D. O. - PROPORTION - SUPREME COURT DECISION - PAYMENT SUBJECT TO.
Fact of the Case:
The Union of India acquired a building in Tilak Marg, New Delhi, owned by the appellant under the Land Acquisition Act. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation for the land, superstructure, and trees. On reference, the Additional District Judge enhanced the compensation for the land and superstructure. Both the owner and the Union of India appealed against the order.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Collector and the Judge erred in assessing the value of the land based on the intimation of the Land and Development Officer (L. and D. O.) and a booklet issued by the Government of India. The court found that the market value of the land should be determined based on actual transactions of neighboring properties of a similar character. The court relied on a sale deed of a property in Ferozshah Road, which was considered a reliable guide to the market value of the appellant's land.
Issues: 1. Whether the Collector and the Judge erred in assessing the value of the land based on the intimation of the L. and D. O. and the booklet issued by the Government of India? 2. Whether the market value of the land should be determined based on actual transactions of neighboring properties of a similar character? 3. Whether the sale deed of the property in Ferozshah Road was a reliable guide to the market value of the appellant's land?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Collector and the Judge erred in assessing the value of the land based on the intimation of the L. and D. O. and the booklet issued by the Government of India. The court reasoned that these sources were not reliable indicators of the market value and that the market value should be determined based on actual transactions of neighboring properties of a similar character. 2. The court held that the market value of the land should be determined based on actual transactions of neighboring properties of a similar character. The court reasoned that this was the most reliable method for determining the market value and that it was consistent with the concept of a willing buyer and willing seller. 3. The court held that the sale deed of the property in Ferozshah Road was a reliable guide to the market value of the appellant's land. The court reasoned that the sale was a genuine and not a collusive transaction and that it represented what a willing purchaser was prepared to pay to a willing seller.
Final Decision: The court allowed the owner's appeal and enhanced the compensation for the land to Rs. 200 per square yard. The court also upheld the Judge's assessment of the compensation for the superstructure. The court dismissed the Union of India's appeal.
( 1 ) :- These are two cross-appeals from the order of the Addl. District Judge dt. 23rd Dec. 1978.
( 2 ) PURSUANT to a notification dated Mar. 6, 1967 issued under S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act) the Union of India, respondent, acquired building No. 20, Tilak Marg, New Delhi owned by the appellant. In due course the Land Acquisition Collector made the award. He awarded compensation at Rs. 100/-per square yard for the land. For the superstructure standing on the land he awarded Rs. 62,270/ -. For trees he gave Rs. 606/ -.
( 3 ) ON reference under S. 18 of the Act the learned Addl. District Judge enhanced the compensation. For the land he awarded to the owner Rs. 150/- per square yard instead of Rs. 100/- per square yard. For superstructure he awarded Rs. 99,270/ -. This meant an increase of Rs. 37,000/- over and above what the Collector had awarded to the land owner for the superstructure. The learned Judge held that out of the compensation so awarded half will go to Capt. Mahabir Prasad Memory Trust and half will go to the appellant, Inder Persad (now dead and represented by his widow Smt. Sneh Lata Prasad ). From the order of the Addl. District Judge these two appeals have been brought R. F. A. 119/79 is the owner s appeal. R. F. A. 507/79 is the appeal of the taker of the land, Union of India.
( 4 ) IN the owner s appeal only one claim has been made and it is about the value of the land. Mr. Hari Shankar, learned counsel for the land owner, says that the land ought to have been valued at Rs. 200/- per square yard. For this contention he has mainly relied on the sale deed dated Feb. 25, 1965 in respect of 24, Feroz Shah Road. This property, built on a plot of land admeasuring 1. 315 acres, was sold for a sum of Rs. 23 lacs by Smt. Vidya Malhotra to USSR Embassy. One Mr. R. C. Mehta, architect, was examined by the land owner. He deposed that the superstructure on 24, Feroz Shah Road, in his opinion, should cost about Rs. 2 lacs. The value of the land on his estimate came to Rs. 21 lacs. The market price of the land on this basis works out to Rs. 330/-per square yard. This was his evidence. There is no evidence in rebuttal as against this.
( 5 ) AT the stage of the Land Acquisition Collector a curious thing happened in this case. It is mentioned in the award of the Collector that "the Land and Development Officer has intimated that the market value fixed by the Government for Tilak Marg is Rs. 150/- per square yard on the material date, that is 6-3-1967. These values have been fixed by the Government for the purpose of levy of various charges under the lease. " But the Collector did not accept the value intimated by the L. and D. O. The reason he gave is that Tilak Marg area can be used for institutional purposes only. Therefore he reduced the value as given by the L. and D. O. by 1/3rd and assessed the value of the land at Rs. 100/- per square yard. At the stage of reference the learned Judge did not agree with this method of reduction. He acted on the information "intimated" by the L. and D. O. to the Collector. According to the intimation he fixed the market value of the land at Rs. 150/- per square yard.
( 6 ) IN our opinion the method adopted by the Collector as well as by the learned Judge is open to serious objection. The Act requires the Tribunal assessing compensation to determine the market value of the land at the relevant date, which under the Act is the date of notification under S. 4 of the Act. Mr. Rattan Lal, learned counsel for the Union of India, has drawn our attention to a booklet issued by the Government of India. In this booklet the land values of lease hold lands in various localities of New Delhi and Old Delhi for residential and commercial purposes have been given as prevailing in 1965. It is interesting to note that Barakhamba Road which is in the close vicinity of Tilak Marg has been valued at Rs. 200/- per square yard for residential purposes and Rs. 400/- per square yard for c
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.