1996 Supreme(J&K) 62

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
G.D. Sharma, J.
Union Of India & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
Chain Singh & Ors. - Respondent
CIA No. 31/1994
Decided On : 21 May, 1996

The market value of acquired land is to be determined based on the price it would have fetched in the open market if it had remained in the same condition and been sold on the date of acquisition.

Headnote:

LAND ACQUISITION - COMPENSATION - MARKET VALUE - TREES - ARBITRATION FEE - SOLATIUM - INTEREST: 1. Market Value: The market value of the acquired land is to be determined based on the price it would have fetched in the open market if it had remained in the same condition and been sold on the date of acquisition. 2. Trees: Compensation for standing trees is to be assessed based on the market value of the trees, considering their age, type, and condition. 3. Arbitration Fee: The arbitrator cannot charge an arbitration fee under the Arbitration Act in proceedings conducted under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act. 4. Solatium and Interest: Solatium and interest are not payable under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants, Union of India, Estates Officer, and Assistant Defence Officer, challenged an award given by an arbitrator under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act. The land in question was requisitioned in 1950 and acquired in 1988. The Deputy Commissioner fixed the compensation rates, which were challenged by the landowners. An arbitrator was appointed, who awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 70,000 per kanal for the land and Rs. 14 lakhs for the standing trees. The appellants and the landowners both appealed the award.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the arbitrator had correctly determined the market value of the land, taking into account its location, size, and potential for commercial development. However, the court found that the arbitrator had erred in assessing the compensation for the standing trees, as there was no cogent evidence to support the number and value of the trees claimed by the landowners. The court also held that the arbitrator had no authority to charge an arbitration fee under the Arbitration Act, as the proceedings were conducted under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act. The court further held that solatium and interest were not payable under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act.

Issues: 1. Whether the market value of the acquired land was determined and paid as per the prevailing market rate at the time of requisition? 2. Whether the compensation for standing trees was not paid to the landowners, and if so, to what compensation the landowners are entitled? 3. Whether the petitioners are entitled to solatium (Jabrana) at the rate of 15% and interest on the amount of compensation?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The market value of the acquired land is to be determined based on the price it would have fetched in the open market if it had remained in the same condition and been sold on the date of acquisition. 2. Compensation for standing trees is to be assessed based on the market value of the trees, considering their age, type, and condition. 3. The arbitrator cannot charge an arbitration fee under the Arbitration Act in proceedings conducted under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act. 4. Solatium and interest are not payable under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act.

Final Decision: The court partially allowed the appeal of the appellants and rejected the appeal of the landowners. The court modified the award to reduce the compensation for the standing trees to Rs. 4 lakhs and set aside the arbitrator's fee. The court directed that the compensation amount deposited in court be paid to the landowners after the expiry of the appeal period.