Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SMT. SATYABHAMA BAI & ORS. ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/08/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCALE (6)38
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4847-48 AND 4849-50 OF 1995
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 was published on January 12, 1979. The possession
of the land was taken on August 25, 1980 dispensing with the
enquiry under Section 5-A by exercise of the power under
Section 17(4). The Land Acquisition Officer granted
compensation in his award under Section 11 on May 26, 1980
Rs.44,000/- per hectare. On reference, the civil Court by
its award dated March 28, 1990 enhanced the compensation to
Rs.1.50 per sq.ft. with solatium and interest thereon. The
claimants filed the appeals and State filed the cross
appeals. The High Court by its judgment and order dated
August 31,1994 relying upon Exs.P-5 to P-8 and the sale
deeds marked thereof under Section 51-A of the Act enhanced
the compensation to Rs.3/- per sq.ft. Thus, these appeals by
special leave.
It is now well settled legal position as laid in the
case of P. Ram Reddy & Ors. vs. Land Acquisition Officer,
Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad & Ors.
[(1995) 2 SCC 305] followed by catena of other decisions
that filing of the certified copies of the sale deeds and
marked thereor under Section 51-A is only to enable the
claimants to dispense with the obligation, to produce the
original sale deed from the owners who are disinclined to
part with their valuable title deed during long pendency of:
the proceedings. However, the claimants are enjoined to call
as witnesses the vendee or vendee to prove the transactions
as genuine in nature and also the extent of consideration
paid and relative nature of value of land as required under
law. In this case though the documents, Exs.P-5 to P-8 have
been marked, none of the persons connected with the
documents has been examined.
Under these circumstances, the sale deeds cannot be
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
relied on to determine the compensation. The High Court and
the Tribunal, therefore, obviously committed grievous error
of law in relying upon those untested and unproved sale
deeds in determining the compensation. The award or the
reference Court and also that of the High Court stands set
aside. The matter is remitted to the reference Court for
disposal in accordance with law.
All the appeals are allowed, out, in the circumstances
without costs.
Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on
April 21, 1995, the respondents in C.A. SLP (C) Nos. 21466-
67/94 had furnished the bank guarantee to the extent of the
half of the enhanced compensation and have withdrawn the
same. The order would continue pending disposal of the
reference application under Section 18 of the Act and
depending upon the award that may be passed, appropriate
direction will be given, by the reference Court for
adjustment or recovery thereof.