SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(P&H) 487

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and G.T. Nanavati, JJ.
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Karnataka Housing Board - Appellants
Versus
P.M. Mallappa - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 2228-34 of 1997 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 24593-99 of 1996).
Decided On : 14 March, 1997

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. G.L. Sanghi, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.K. Kulkarni and Ms. Sangeeta Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. S.R. Bhat, Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Mrs. Kiran Bhardwaj and Ms. Hetu Arora, Advocates.

The potential value of land for compensation should be determined based on the land existing as on the date of the notification and not after subsequent developments have taken place.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition - Compensation - Interpretation of potential value of land - Enhancement of compensation

Fact of the Case:

The case involved an appeal arising from a judgment of the Karnataka High Court regarding the compensation for land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act. The High Court had enhanced the compensation to Rs. 12/- per sq. yd., amounting to Rs. 58,000/- per acre.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the High Court was incorrect in enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12/- per sq.yd., as the potential value of the land should be determined as of the date of the notification and not based on subsequent developments. The Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the judgment and order of the High Court and confirming that of the reference Court.

Issues: The main issue was whether the High Court was justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12/- per sq. yd., i.e., Rs. 58,000/- per acre, for dry land acquisition.

Ratio Decidendi: The potential value of the land for compensation purposes should be determined based on the land existing as on the date of the notification and not after subsequent developments have taken place. The value of the developed land bears no relevance to further enhancement of the value.

Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the judgment and order of the High Court were set aside, and that of the reference Court was confirmed. No costs were awarded.

ORDER

K. Ramaswamy, J. - Notice on other respondents has been served. They are not appearing either in person or through counsel. Delay condoned. S.R. Bhatt appears for one respondent in one appeal.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals, by special leave, arise from the judgment of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court, dated December 22, 1995 made in M.F.A. Nos. 2688/88 and batch.

4. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, the Act) acquiring a large extent of land was published on March 25, 1971. The Land Acquisition Officer in his award granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 8,000/- per acre for the dry lands with which we are now concerned. We are not concerned with other lands because there is no appeal in that behalf. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the Civil Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 15,000/- per acre. The High Court remitted the matter to the reference Court for reconsideration. Thereafter, the reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 38,000/-. On appeal, the High Court by the impugned judgment has enhanced the compensation to Rs. 12/- per sq. yd. which amounts to Rs. 58,000/- per acre. It is seen that since the respondents have not filed any appeal under Section 26 of the Act against the award granting enhanced compensation of Rs. 38,000/- per acre, we do not propose to go into the enhancement granted by the reference Court.

5. The only question is : whether the High Court would be justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12/- per sq. yd., in other words, Rs. 58,000/- per acre. Admittedly, the land is dry land and the Land Acquisition Officer had pointed out in his award that the converted lands for which he had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 9,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- per acre, bear different connotation to the actual dry land existing as on that date. The potential value shall be determined for the land existing as on the date of the notification and not after subsequent developments have taken place. The value of the developed land bears no relevance to further enhancement of the value. Under these circumstances, the High Court was wholly incorrect in enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12/- per sq.yd., i.e., Rs. 58,000/- per acre.

6. The appeals are accordingly allowed and the judgment and order of the High Court stand set aside and that of the reference Court stands confirmed. No costs.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top