Back
1997 Supreme(Guj) 226
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :J.N.Bhatt, M.H.Kadri
Special Land Acquisition Officer - Appellant
Versus
Motibhai Mohan Bhai - Respondent
First Appeal 4626 of 1996
Decided On : 05/06/1997
Headnote:(a) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sec. 23 - Market value - Assessment - Principles governing - Court has to value property in its actual condition at the time of acquisition with existing advantage & possibilities excluding any advantage due to carrying out of the scheme for the purpose for which property is compulsorily acquired - For the purpose Court has to put itself in arm-chair of prudent seller but not anxious purchaser as on the date of notification under Sec. 4 of the Act.
The market value is value to a seller of property in its actual condition, at the time of acquisition, with existing advantages and possibilities excluding any advantage due to carrying out of the scheme for the purpose for which the property is compulsorily acquired. The market value as used in Sec .23 is the price that an owner willing and not obliged to sell might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser with whom he was bargaining for the sale and purchase of the land. It is the price which would be obtainable in the market or a concrete parcel of land with its peculiar advantages and its particular draw-backs.
[Para 10]
The market value is the commercial value of the land and the authority or court, while making assessment of the market value for the purpose of compensation to be awarded in respect of acquisition of land or property, has to put itself in arm-chair of willing purchaser. The test propounded in this behalf by catena of judicial pronouncements is to see that the owner of the land acquired under the Act is given compensation of the market value of the land or property obtainable as on the date of publication of notification under Sec. 4 of the Act. The theory of restitutive compensation is not applicable but, at the same time, it is settled proposition of law that for determining valuation of the land or property in question under Sec. 23 of the Act, the court is obliged to occupy arm-chair of prudent seller but not anxious purchaser and determine the valuation. What should be the approach of the court in such factual situation is stated in number of decisions.
[Para 11]
(b) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Secs. 18, 23 & 54 - Reference Court partly allowing reference enhenced market value of land from Rs. 180/- per Are to Rs. 680/- and also allowed additional advantage of solatium & interest - Appeal against - Land under acquisition belong to village Kelod of Bharuch district - No evidence of comperable sale instances available - Reference Court relied on award in respect of agricultural lands situated in village Samni within a distance of 1.5 k.m. in land reference Case No. 606/86 which has become final - Reference Court considering the lapse of seven years to the award in said case allowed increase in the value of land at the rate of 10 per- cent. & determined the market value of land at Rs. 680/- per Are. - Land in both the villages are of same quality in respect of fertility & productivity - In this back drop of facts, grant of additional compensation at the rate Rs. 500/- per Are for entire land with additional benefits as provided under the law not unreasonable - Award of reference Court proper which needs no interference.
As could be seen from the facts emerging from the record of the present case, there was no evidence of comparable sale instances. Therefore, the award of the District Court for compensation made in respect of agricultural lands almost of the same village as that of the lands acquired is rightly held to be comparable, reasonable and acceptable. The award which is relied on by the Reference Court in assessment of the market value and fixing amount of compensation has become final. The agricultural lands covered under the earlier award of the District Court situated in village Samni and the agricultural lands situated in village Kelod covered under the award of the Reference Court under challenge in these appeals are situated in the adjoining villages within a distance of 1.5 k.ms. Therefore, they are comparable units.
[Para 12]
The Reference Court has rightly adopted gradual rise in price at the rate of 10% per annum from 1984 to 1990, which is quite justified. The earlier award, therefore, is good guide and acceptable instance for assessment of the market value and the amount of compensation. No evidence was led on behalf of the appellants before the Reference Court. The evidence led by the claimants before the Reference Court remained unimpeachable. Therefore, the amount of compensation assessed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs. 680/- per Are in place of Rs. 180/- per Are offered by the Land Acquisition Officer against the claim of Rs. 1,250/- per Are cannot be said to be unreasonable, unjust or in any way illegal requiring interference of this Court exercising its power under Sec. 54 of the Act.
[Para 13]
The entitlement of additional amount in view of provisions of amended Sec. 23 has not been questioned and rightly so in view settled proposition of law. The Reference Court has found that claimants are entitled to get 30% solatium of the market value and also amount of 12% increase on additional compensation from the date of publication of notification under Sec. 4 till the date of award under Secs. 23 (1-A) and 23 (2) of the Act. It will not, therefore, be necessary to enter into this aspect in this batch of appeals.
[Para 14]
( 1 ) SINCE this batch of 23 appeals under Sec. 54 of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (the Act) arises out of common judgment and award and raises identical questions, and upon joint request, these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.
( 2 ) PURSUANT to the preliminary notification under Sec. 4 (1) of the Act published in government gazette on 16. 8. 1990 for the purpose of branch canal for Narmada project, agricultural lands of villages Kelod of Bharuch district came to be acquired followed by notification under Sec. 6 published on 27. 12. 1990. The Land Acquisition Officer offered an amount of Rs. 180/- per Are by way of compensation by his order and award dated 27. 6. 1991 which was not acceptable to the respondent-original claimants, as a result of which a Reference under Sec. 18 of the Act came to be made at the instance of the respondents before the District Court at Bharuch. Out of Land Reference Case Nos. 374/92 to 393/92 and 11 to 13/95 which came to be decided by the learned Assistant judge, Bharuch by common judgment and award dated 26. 6. 1996, the aforesaid, Land reference cases were partly allowed. The Reference Court held that the claimants are entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs. 680/- per Are for the acquired lands. In view of the facts and circumstances and the evidence on record, the Reference Court allowed the aforesaid References partly and held that (i) every claimant is entitled to get additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 500/- per Are for the entire land; (ii) every claimant is entitled to get solatium at the rate of 30% on the market value under Sec. 23 (2) of the Act; (iii) every claimant is entitled to get 12% interest per annum from the date of publication of the notification under Sec. 4 of the Act till date of (he award; (iv) every claimant is eligible to get additional compensation from the date of possession of acquired lands at the rate of 9% interest for the first year and thereafter 15% for subsequent year, till payment of compensation. Being aggrieved by the common judgment and award of the Reference Court, the special Land Acquisition Officer, Bharuch has preferred 23 appeals invoking aid of provisions of Sec. 54 of the Act.
( 3 ) THE challenge is against the common award granting additional compensation to the claimants. The only question which is raised for consideration and adjudication in this entire batch of appeals is whether the award of additional amount passed by the District court is excessive and requires our interference exercising our power under Sec. 54 of the Act.
( 4 ) THE claimants placed reliance on the evidence of witness Motibhai Mohanabhai patel, Ex. 10 who is one of the claimants. the Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 180a per Are by his order dated 27. 6. 1991 in respect of the land acquired pursuant to notification under Sec. 4 published on 16. 8. 1990 against the claim of Rs. 1,250/- per Are made by the claimants. The Reference Court placed reliance on the award in respect of agricultural lands situated in village Samni in Land Reference case No. 606 of 1986. Certified copy of the award in the said case was produced before the Reference Court at Ex. 11.
( 5 ) THE Reference Court placed reliance on the award Ex. 11 which has become final. It was in respect of agricultural lands situated in village Samni for the same purpose of narmada project arising out of acquisition of land pursuant to the notification published under Sec. 4 of the Act dated 20. 3. 1983. It was an award of the District Court, Bharuch in which compensation of Rs. 460/- per Are was awarded. It was found by the Reference court from the evidence on record that the said award is comparable, relevant and material for the purpose of adjudicating the claim made by the claimants, holding that it is good evidence for fixing market value of the acquired land i. n question at village kelod.
( 6 ) THE Reference Court observed that
