IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.Subramanian, R.Sakthivel, JJ.
Anandan (Deceased) and ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India Rep. By Secretary to Government (Revenue Department) and ors. – Respondents
A.S.NO.566 OF 2018 AND CMP NO.6666 OF 2021
Decided On : 27-09-2024
JUDGMENT
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
Aggrieved with the Judgment dated February 10, 2022, made in A.S.No.566 of 2018 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the appellants and the first respondent - Union of India had preferred Civil Appeal Nos.3899 and 3900 of 2024 respectively before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide its Order dated March 7, 2024 remanded the matter to this Court to redetermine the relevance of the Sale Deeds produced on record for the purpose of assessing the market value of the lands acquired from the appellants herein.
2.It is apposite to extract the relevant Paragraphs of the aforementioned Order dated March 7, 2024 viz., Paragraph Nos.7 to 11 hereunder:
8.The instant appeals are, accordingly, allowed in part and the impugned judgment is set aside. The matter is remanded to the High Court. The parties are directed to appear before the High Court on 10.04.2024.
9.It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
10.It is pointed out at this stage by learned counsel for the land owners that the compensation awarded by the Reference Court has also not been released so far and that the Authorities have deducted the TDS on whatever compensation amount was paid to the land owners earlier.
11.Since the compensation awarded by the Reference Court is not in dispute at all, the Union of India and other official respondents are directed to release the compensation, as awarded by the Reference Court, along with solatium and statutory interest accrued thereupon till date to the land owners without prejudice to the rights of the parties. Since no TDS can be deducted on the compensation paid for compulsory acquisition, the amount deducted towards TDS shall also be released to the land owners without any delay.”
3.Hence, this Court will now be considering the matter afresh.
Facts in Brief :-
4.The Government of Puducherry decided to acquire ‘land measuring an extent of 19.92.70 Hectares in R.S.No. 21, 24, 25, 26, 43, 44 and 46 of Karuvadikuppam Revenue Village, Oulgaret Taluk, Puducherry District’ [‘acquired lands' for short] for the purpose of expansion of Puducherry Airport. The appellants own a ‘land area of 2.39 Hectares (2,57,257.21 sq. ft) in R.S.No. 25/2 of Karuvadikuppam Revenue Village, Puducherry’ [‘subject land’ for short]. Notification was issued under Section 4 (1) of 'the Land Acquisition Act, 1894' ['L.A. Act' for short] with respect to the acquired lands including the subject land and the same was published in the Gazette on June 30, 2006. The declaration under Section 6 of the L.A. Act was made public on April 25, 2007.
4.1.The 'Land Acquisition Officer' [henceforth 'L.A.O.'] assessed the acquired lands on November 28, 2006, and recorded their valuations on December 6, 2006. During the assessment, the L.A.O. reviewed 874 sale instances that took place between July 8, 2005, and July 7, 2006 i.e., the one-year period before the Notification under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act. Among these sale instances, 78 sale instances were rejected as they involved the sale of land with superstructures. Further, 45 sale instances were excluded because they related to the sale of less than 500 sq.ft., and 576 sale instances were excluded due to their long distance from the acquired lands. Out of the remaining 175 sale instances, the highest sale at Rs.167/- per sq.ft., was rejected as it occurred on February 1, 2006, in anticipation of the acquisition. The next highest sale at Rs.66/-per sq.ft., pertaining t
Nelson Fernandes & Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa & Others
Mala Etc. & Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others
Mehrawal Khewaji Trust Vs. State of Punjab and Others
Mummidi Apparao (D) Through L.Rs. Vs. Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd.
R.V.Dev @ Vasudevan Nair vs. Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala and others
Suresh Kumar Vs. Town Improvement Trust
The court established that the highest market value from comparable sales must be prioritized in compensation assessments for land acquisition, leading to a revised valuation of Rs.250/- per sq.ft.
The court emphasized that the highest value among comparable sales must be considered for compensation in land acquisition cases, unless justified otherwise.
Market value in land acquisition fixed using highest bona fide comparable sale exemplar, with time escalation (10%) and size deductions (20%), considering land potentiality near development areas.
(1) Acquisition of land – When large extent of lands are acquired and if sale exemplar, also for large extent is available on record it would be safer to rely on same if they are comparable transacti....
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.