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

2007 Supreme(All) 3056

[2008(1) ADJ 253 (DB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : AMITAVA LALA AND V.C. MISRA, JJ.
JAGDISH CHANDRA AND OTHERS ......Appellants
Versus
NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, NOIDA AND ANOTHER .....Respondents
(First Appeal Nos. 744 and 1051 of 2001, 901 and 1050 of 2004, 31 of 2002, 739, 742, 1052 of 2001, 578 and 1033 of 2003 736 and 761 of 2001, 187 of 2006, 743, 468, 435, 481, 425, 445, 475, 782, 472, 439, 452, 488, 454, 458 and 440 of 2001, 966 of 2004, 694 of 2005, 904 of 2004, 1054, 1053 and 1049 of 2001, 1051 of 2004, 737 of 2001, 868 of 2002, 844 of 2000, 459, 476, 478, 467, 470 and 471 of 2001, 447 of 2002, 426, 433, 434, 437, 438, 441, 442, 443, 444, 448, 447, 455, 462, 463, 464, 465, 469, 473, 474, 477, 479 and 436 of 2001, 961, 956, 962, 958 and 960 of 2003, 734 and 1062 of 2001, 39 of 2002, 903 of 2004, 806 of 2000, 193 of 2002, 965 of 2004, 115 of 2005, 412 of 2007, 745, 733, 741 and 740 of 2001, decided on 14th December, 2007)

Advocates:
Counsel :
D.V. Singh for the Appellants; A.K. Roy and S.C. for the Respondents.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Sections 18, 4, 23 and 24—Acquisition of land—Determining compensation payable to claimants in Reference suit filed under Section 18 of Act—Appeals praying that award be modified, enhancing compensation from Rs. 148.75 per sq. yd. to Rs. 297.50 per sq. yd.—And also challenged deduction of 50% of sale amount by Reference Court—And claimed solatium and additional compensation, as well as interest, having accrued thereupon—Whether there was any provision of deduction towards development provided under Act, Rules, Regulations, or Guidelines, if so, its justification—And whether entire land so acquired and earmarked exclusively for “Park” requires any deduction in market value for arriving at a just compensation for purposes of development of “Park”—Held, impugned reference and award to extent of deduction made from correct market value for arriving at amount of compensation to be paid to petitioners, was quashed—And respondents directed to re-calculate amount of compensation, without deducting any amount towards development charges—And pay same to petitioners, alongwith interest @ 10% p.a. to be calculated on the same from date amount of compensation was to be paid till date of payment. [Paras 15, 20, 21 and 22]

       

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble V.C. Misra, J.—All the aforesaid connected first appeals arising out of one and common judgment and award dated 28.8.2000 passed by the Xth Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad determining compensation payable to the claimants in reference suit filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act"), have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment and order having binding effect upon all the aforesaid first appeals.

2. By the present appeals the appellants have prayed that the aforesaid award dated 28.8.2000 be modified enhancing the compensation from Rs. 148.75 per square yard to Rs. 297.50 per square yard and have challenged the deduction of 50% of the sale amount by the Reference Court and claimed solatium and additional compensation as well as interest having accrued thereupon.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that preliminary notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was issued on 30.10.1987 for acquiring the total area of land admeasuring 494-9-19 bighas (309.060 Acre) in village Chalera Banger, NOIDA district Ghaziabad now in district Gautam Budh Nagar. The said notification was published in the official Gazette dated 27.2.1988 as well as in the daily newspaper on 11.6.1989 and subsequently a corrigendum was issued on 18.6.1989 and 24.6.1989 correcting and modifying the notification published in the Gazette dated 27.2.1988. The reference Court held the relevant date of notification to be the last date of publication i.e. 24.6.1989. Following the same a notification under Section 6 of the Act read with Section 17 (4) of the Act was issued on 15.12.1989 and possession over the land in question was taken on 31.3.1990, 6.10.1990 and 30.9.1991. The Collector passed an award on 4.2.1992 on the basis of 62 sale deeds executed in respect of different plots of the village, in question, i.e. Chalera Banger of the last three years and determined the compensation at the rate of Rs. 43.64 per square yard on the basis of sale deed dated 29.8.1987 while in the said sale deed the land was sold at the rate of Rs. 54.54 per square yard, after allowing 20 per cent deduction in the said rate. Being aggrieved the appellant/claimants preferred reference, under protest, which was referred for adjudication to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. The reference Court relying upon an agreement to sell dated 19.4.1989 as exemplar taking into consideration the potentiality of about six bigha adjoining land of the same village identically situated as the land, in question, held the market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 297.50 per square yard and after deducting 50 per cent of the said sale amount, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 148.75 per square yard which is under challenge.

4. Being aggrieved, the appellant/claimants preferred the present appeals challenging the validity of said deduction of 50 per cent from the market rate made by the reference Court on the ground that it was unsustainable in the eye of law and that the appellant/claimants were entitled to solatium and additional compensation as well as interest accrued upon it as the same was payable under the Act and its denial was illegal as awarding of interest on solatium and additional compensation is no longer res-integra and more so, as the land of the individual tenure holder was of similar size as that of the exemplar and no deduction, whatsoever, was called for under the facts and circumstances of the instant case in spite of the fact that the market value of the land was much more than Rs. 1,000 per square yard.

5. Learned Counsel for the appellant/claimants has submitted that the sale exemplar was rightly relied upon by the reference Court which was of an area of 5-18-10 bigha land and the agreement to sell was duly executed in April, 1988, which was followed by different sale deeds executed at the same rate of land, as mentioned in the agreement to sell, bonafides of which w


















































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