2022 Supreme(Raj) 871

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.
Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Limited, through Senior Deputy General Manager, RIICO Limited and ors. – Petitioners
Versus
M/s Ginni International Ltd. – Respondent
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3104 of 2015
Decided On : 20-10-2022

Compensation for acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act cannot be determined solely on the basis of rates mentioned in the records/ documents issued by the Deputy Registrar, Registration and Stamps Department i.e. DLC Rates. The Reference Court is required to consider all relevant factors and evidence, including DLC rates, while determining the compensation.

Headnote:

LAND ACQUISITION - ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION - DLC RATES - UN-EXHIBITED DOCUMENT - EVIDENCE - BURDEN OF PROOF - REFERENCE COURT - REMAND - FRESH DECISION - RELEVANT FACTORS - DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION.

Fact of the Case:

The respondent's land was acquired by the State Government for extension of Industrial Area. A Notification under section 6 of the Act of 1894 was issued on 02.02.2006. Total 0.83 hectare land of the respondent from Khasra No.35 situated in Village Majra Kaath was acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 10.04.2006 and total compensation was determined as Rs.51,26,766/-including interest under Section 23(1A) of the Act with 30% solatium. Feeling dissatisfied by the award dated 10.04.2006, the respondent submitted a reference petition under section 18 of the Act of 1894 for enhancement of compensation for treating the land as residential and not agricultural. Learned Senior Civil Judge allowed the reference vide judgment dated 06.03.2013 and held that the respondent was entitled to get compensation @ 1600/-per sq. feet along-with interest @ 12% from the date of publication of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act of 1894 dated 12.9.2005 and also entitled for 30% solatium. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 06.03.2013, the appellants i.e. Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Ltd. (RIICO) submitted S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1889/2013, before this Court which was allowed vide judgment dated 14.02.2014 with the following observations and directions. The matter was remanded to the lower court for decision on the matter afresh based on “evidence” with regard to the market price of the land acquired as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act of 1894 i.e. 12.09.2005. After remand of the matter, learned Civil Judge, reheard the matter and re-determined the amount of compensation of the land @ Rs.80/-per sq. feet on the basis of the District Land Committee Rates (DLC rates) submitted by the respondent, vide judgment dated 23.4.2015. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 23.04.2015, the appellants RIICO has submitted this appeal.

Finding of the Court:

The Reference Court has decided the matter in favour of the respondent without following the directions of this Court issued at the time of remand and the impugned judgment has been passed without recording any “evidence”.

Issues: 1. Whether compensation can be determined solely on the basis of rates mentioned in the records/ documents issued by the Deputy Registrar, Registration and Stamps Department i.e. DLC Rates? 2. Whether the Reference Court was justified in determining the compensation only on the basis of DLC rates without following the directions of this Court issued at the time of remand?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The circle rates prescribed by the administration cannot constitute the sole criteria for fixing the market value of the acquired land and the matter was remitted back to the authorities for fresh determination by taking into consideration the relevant factors and the evidence, which in an appropriate case includes circle rates. 2. The rates fixed for collection of stamp duty cannot be relied upon to determine the compensation under Section 23 of the Act of 1894. 3. The circulars issued by the Government for fixation of stamp duty and registration fees would not form the basis to determine the compensation unless evidence is adduced as regards the prevailing market value of the land in the locality prescribed of similar advantageous features. 4. The approach of the Reference Court was erroneous where the amount of compensation was determined on the basis of the value of the land fixed by the authority for the purpose of stamp duty. 5. The determination of DLC rates is only an assessment of market value of the property and not a conclusive proof of it. 6. The market value of the land under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act cannot be fixed on the basis of the rates mentioned in the basic valuation and the registers can be maintained for the purpose of collection of proper stamp duty only. 7. The prices mentioned in the Ready Reckoner for the purpose of calculation of the stamp duty, which are fixed for the entire area, cannot be the basis for determination of the compensation under the Land Acquisition Act.

Final Decision: The impugned judgment dated 23.04.2015 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Alwar is quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Reference Court for decision of the matter afresh. The Reference Court shall be free to make the determination of compensation by taking into consideration all the relevant factors and the evidence which may be appropriate including DLC rates, after giving opportunity of hearing to both the sides.