Court reaffirms right to fair market value in land acquisition, stressing reliance on genuine comparable sales and entitlement to higher solatium and interest.

1. This appeal arises out of the Land Acquisition Reference No. 66 of 1984 decided on 18-8-1987, by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Aurangabad.

2. The Appellants are the claimants. They have together 2/3rd share in the land forming part of CTS No. 19049/1 admeasuring 8809 sq. mts situated at Padampura, Aurangabad Railway Station, Aurangabad. The said land came to be acquired for the purpose of development of Railway road in Marathwada area to merge Meter Guage line passing from Manmad to Kachiguda through Aurangabad Centre into Broad Gauge line. The notification under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (for short the Act) which was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette on 21-1-1862 by applying the urgent clause. The notification under S.6 of the Act was issued on 23-3-1982 which was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette on 8-4-1982. The Special L and Acquisition Officer passed the Award. on 23-2-1984. The Special Land Acquisition Officer valued the land virtually adopting a belting method for determination of the compensation. The total area under the plotting system came to be considered 6539 sq. mts. and its value was assessed at Rs. 6,90,990/-.
With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties we worked out the price at which the compensation was awarded and it comes to Rs. 105/- per sq. mt. i.e. Rs. 9.82 / per sq. ft.

3. The Appellants - claimants were dissatisfied with the Award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, as according to them, the compensation awarded in their favour was inadequate and unreasonable. They, therefore, made application for reference to the Court under S.18 of the Act. It was stated that the market price of the comparable land as prevailing on the relevant date of the acquisition of the land was Rs. 25/- per sq. ft. In support of that say of the Appellants, they relied on two sale instances Exhibits 31 and 32 to show that the land in neighbouring area was sold at the rate of Rs. 25.25 ps. per sq. ft. in August, 1981 and in November, 1984, at the rate of Rs. 33/- per sq. ft. respectively. In addition to these sale deeds the Appellants also relied on one more sale instance dated 5-8-1981 to show that the price fetched for a plot of 60 x 60 ft. was at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. ft. Lastly the agreements of sale dated 29-9-1981 at Exhibits 27 and 28 were also relied on but those were cancelled by the parties subsequently.

4. The Court below, concurring with the Award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer rejected the reference by his order dated 18-8-1987.

5. Shri Khader, learned Counsel for the Appellants, argued with reference to the sale instance relied on by the claimants that the court below had made a wrong application of principle and also overlooked or misapplied the important points affecting the valuation of the acquired land. It was submitted by the learned counsel that for the purpose of assessment of the market value of the land the Court below ought to have taken it as urban land with high potentialities and its value ought to have been determined on the basis of sale instances relied on by the appellants. It was also submitted that the method of valuation as adopted in the present case in ascertaining the market value of the land acquired on principle of deduction of the area or value for the purpose of compensation was not correct since the acquired property is situated in a developed area with little or no requirement of further development. The learned counsel next argued that the court below erred in not considering the statutory benefits accrued to the cla