Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
THAKUR KAMTA PRASAD SINGH (DEAD) BY L.Rs.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THE STATE OF BIHAR
DATE OF JUDGMENT10/03/1976
BENCH:
KHANNA, HANS RAJ
BENCH:
KHANNA, HANS RAJ
GOSWAMI, P.K.
CITATION:
1976 AIR 2219 1976 SCR (3) 585
1976 SCC (3) 772
CITATOR INFO :
F 1977 SC 899 (7)
RF 1977 SC1560 (7)
ACT:
Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Sections 23 and 24-Market
value-Compensation-Potential possibilities.
HEADNOTE:
The respondents acquired appellant’s land under the
Land Acquisition Act. The Land Acquisition officer awarded
compensation at the rate of Rs. 3000/-per acre. In a
reference under s. 18, the Additional District Judge
enhanced the compensation to Rs. 800/- per katha (1/32 of an
acre). On appeal by the State, the High Court reduced the
compensation to Rs. 475/- per katha.
In an appeal by certificate the appellant contended
that the High Court was in error in reducing the rate of
compensation.
Dismissing the appeal,
^
HELD: (1) The Additional District Judge wrongly
excluded certain sale transactions on the ground that the
plots in those transactions were at some distance from the
acquired land. The High Court rightly held that the said
transactions could not be excluded altogether from
consideration. The High Court also took into account 3 other
sale transactions which were relied upon by the appellant.
The High Court rightly excluded from consideration certain
sale deeds executed by the appellant. These transactions
related to small plots of land situated on road site and
were entered into after the land in dispute had been
notified for acquisition. [586E-H, 587C-D]
(2) Market value under s. 23 means the price that a
willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller for property
having due regard to its existing condition with all its
existing advantages and its potential possibilities when
laid out in the most advantageous manner excluding any
advantages due to the carrying out of the scheme for which
the property is compulsorily acquired. In considering market
value the disinclination of the vendor to part with his land
and the urgent necessity of the purchaser to buy should be
disregarded. [587E-F]
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
(3) There is an element of guess work inherent in most
cases involving determination of the market value of the
acquired land. But, this in the very nature of things cannot
be helped. The essential thing is to keep in view the
relevant factors prescribed by the Act. The finding of the
High Court is based upon consideration of the evidence
adduced in the case and there are no grounds to interfere
with that finding.[587F-G]
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1436 of
1968.
From the Judgment and order dated 28-9-67 of the Patna
High Court in Appeal from original Decree No. 129/62
V.S. Desai and B.P. Singh for the Appellant.
R.C. Prasad for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
KHANNA, J.-This is an appeal on certificate under
article 133(1) (a) of the Constitution against the judgment
of the Patna High Court whereby the appeal of the respondent
State against the award of the
586
learned Additional District Judge Arrah was allowed in part
and the amount of compensation payable to the respondent in
a land acquisition case was reduced.
The respondent-State acquired 23.70 acres of the
appellant’s land out of plots Nos. 529 and 1262 appertaining
to Khata No. 1 in village Tenduni in Shahbad district for
the purpose of constructing an Irrigation Research Station.
Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act
(hereinafter referred to as the Act) was first published on
March 8, 1957, but this notification was cancelled on
December 2, 1957. Another notification for the acquisition
of the said land was issued under section 4 of the Act on
January 1, 1959. The Land Acquisition officer awarded
compensation to the appellant at the rate of Rs. 3,000 per
acre, besides certain other amounts with which we are not
concerned. The total compensation awarded by the Land
Acquisition officer came to Rs. 86,070.92. The appellant got
a reference made under section 18 of the Act. Learned
Additional District Judge Arrah who disposed of the
reference held the market value of the land to be Rs. 800
per katha. It is stated that there are 32 kathas in an acre.
On appeal by the State the High Court assessed the market
value of the land at Rs. 475 per katha.
In appeal before us, learned counsel for the appellant
has assailed the judgment of the High Court and has
contended that the High Court was in error in reducing the
rate at which compensation had been awarded. As against
that, learned counsel for the respondent-State has canvassed
for the correctness of the view taken by the High Court.
We have given the matter our consideration, and are of
the view that there is no merit in this appeal. A number of
documents were filed on behalf of the State to show the
market value of the land in question. Those documents showed
that a plot measuring 66 acres in the same village, in which
the land in dispute is situated, was sold for Rs. 2,000 on
March 13, 1958 at the rate of Rs. 94 per katha. Another sale
transaction related to the sale of 22.5 decimals of land on
November 22, 1958 at the rate of Rs. 58 per katha. A third
transaction related to the sale of .06 acre of land for Rs.
100 on August 12, 1957 at the rate of Rs. 52 per katha. The
Additional District Judge excluded these sale transactions
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
out of consideration on the ground that the plots which were
the subject matter of those sales were at some distance from
the acquired land. The High Court took the view, in our
opinion rightly, that these sale transactions could not be
excluded altogether from consideration. The High Court also
took into account three other sale transactions which had
been relied upon by the appellant. Those sale transactions
related to sale of five dhurs of land for Rs. 275 on October
19, 1957 at the rate of Rs. 1,100 per katha, 15 dhurs of
land for Rs. 750 on November 5, 1956 at the rate of Rs.
1,000 per katha and 15 dhurs of land for Rs. 750/- on
September 28, 1956 at the rate of Rs. 1,000 per katha. One
katha is said to consist of 20 dhurs. The land which was the
subject of these sale transactions abutted the road and,
from the small size of the plots, it appears that they were
purchased for the purpose of constructing
587
shops or similar buildings thereon. The land now sought to
be acquired does not abut the road. It is in evidence that
in making acquisition the strip of the land of the appellant
up to a depth of 100 ft. from the road was not acquired. The
High Court on taking into consideration the above three sale
transactions relied upon by the appellant and three sale
transactions relied upon by the respondent found the mean
price of the land covered by the six sale deeds to be a
little more than Rs. 460 per katha. The High Court in the
circumstances came to the conclusion that the just and fair
market value of the land should be assessed at Rs. 475 per
katha. The above rate included, according to the High Court,
the potential value of the land. In addition to that, the
appellant was held entitled to 15 per cent solatium for
compulsory acquisition. We find no infirmity in the above
approach of the High Court. The finding of the High Court is
based upon consideration of the evidence adduced in the
case, and no cogent ground has been shown to us as to why we
should interfere with that finding.
We may observe that the High Court excluded from
consideration certain sale deeds executed by the appellant.
These transactions related to small plots of land situated
on the roadside and were entered in to after the land in
dispute had been notified for acquisition. In the opinion of
the High Court, the said sale deeds could not form a safe
criterion for assessing the market value of the acquired
land because they had been executed by the claimant himself
after the notification. It was also observed that the plots
sold were quite suitable for shop or residential purposes.
We find no sufficient reason to take a contrary view.
Section 23 of the Act provides that in determining the
amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquisition
under the Act the Court shall inter alia take into
consideration the market value of the land at the date of
the publication of the notification under section 4 of the
Act. Market value means the price that a willing purchaser
would pay to a willing seller for the property having due
regard to its existing condition with all its existing
advantages and its potential possibilities when laid out in
the most advantageous manner excluding any advantages due to
the carrying out of the scheme for which the property is
compulsorily acquired. In considering market value the
disinclination of the vendor to part with his land and the
urgent necessity of the purchaser to buy should be
disregarded. There is an element of guess work inherent in
most cases involving determination of the market value of
the acquired land, but this in the very nature of things
cannot be helped. The essential thing is to keep in view the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
relevant factors prescribed by the Act. If the judgment of
the High Court reveals that it has taken into consideration
the relevant factors, its assessment of the fair market
value of the acquired land should not be disturbed. No such
infirmity has been brought to our notice as might induce us
to disturb the finding of the High Court. The appeal
consequently fails and is dismissed but in the circumstances
without costs.
P.H.P. Appeal dismissed.
588