Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
CHANDER BHAN AND OTHERS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/11/1998
BENCH:
V.N.KHARE
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
V.N.Khare.J.
Leave granted.
This set of Civil Appeals which is directed against
the judgment of a Division Bench of Delhi High Court relates
to appellants’ claim for enhancement of compensation with
regard to acquisition of their land situated in village
Rangpuri @ Malikpur Kohi, Delhi. Since common questions of
fact and law are involved in this set of appeals, we propose
to decide them by a common judgment.
A large extent of land in village Rangpuri near
Palam Airport was notified for acquisition vide notification
dated 3.12.1971 issued under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the ’Act’)
for planned development of Delhi. Simultaneously,
notification dated 3.12.1971 were also issued for
acquisition of land in village Nangal Dewat and Shahbad
Mohemmedpur. Some plots of land of village Rangpuri were
acquired vide Award No. 94/72-73 dated 12.3.1973. The Land
Acquisition Collector while assessing the market value of
the acquired land covered by the aforesaid Award, divided
the said land into two blocks and fixed Rs. 3,300/- and Rs.
2,200/- per bigha for Block-A and Block-B, respectively.
The claimants being dissatisfied with the offer of
compensation preferred reference petitions under Section 18
of the Act. The learned Additional District Judge enhanced
the compensation to Rs. 4,800/- per bigha in respect of
Block-A and Rs.3,200/- in respect of Block-B. The
appellants before us being not satisfied with the
compensation awarded by the learned Additional District
Judge preferred Regular Appeals before the High Court. The
High Court by the judgment under appeal assessed the market
value of appellants’ acquired land at Rs. 13,000/- per
bigha. Consequently, the claimants’ appeals were allowed.
Still not satisfied with the rates of compensation
determined by the High Court the appellants have come to
this Court by filing special leave petitions.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
referred to a decision of this Court in the case of Gokal
Vs. State of Haryana A.I.R. 1992 SC 150, wherein this
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
Court determined market value of the land on the date of
relevant notifications at Rs. 20/-, Rs. 25/-, Rs. 26/and
Rs. 30/per sq. yard, respectively. On the strength of
this decision it was urged that the increase in the market
value of land per year comes to over Rs. 5,000/- per bigha
and if the market value of land is taken to Rs. 3,000/- per
bigha on 23rd Jajuary, 1965 as determined by the High Court,
the value of appellant’s land should be increased by Rs.
5,000/per bigha for each year. The submissions of learned
counsel for the appellants, therefore is that if the
aforesaid principle is adopted the market value of land on
the date of notification issued under section 4 of the Act
would be Rs. 33,000/- per bigha. We have gone through the
decision referred to above but do not find any principle
having been laid down therein for such increase in the
compensation for the acquired land as is canvassed by
learned counsel for the appellants. Although it is true
that compensation was increased in Gokal’s case (supra) but
no reasons were given for increasing the compensation. We
are, therefore, of view that Gokal’s case (supra) is of no
help to the contention of learned counsel for the
appellants. On the other hand, the High Court while
assessing the market value of the appellants’ land relied
upon a Division Bench decision of Delhi High Court in the
case of Jai Lal Vs. Union of India, R.F.A. No. 203/82
decided on 27.4.88 which related to determination of
compensation in respect of land in village Nangal Dewat with
reference to the notification dated 3.12.1971. The High
Court in the said case awarded uniform compensation @ Rs.
13,000/- per bigha. In the present case it was found by the
High Court that the acquired land in village Nangal Dewat
and the appellants’ land are similarly situated, therefore,
the rates of compensation should be uniform. Accordingly,
the High Court assessed the market value of the land at Rs.
13,000/- per bigha. Thus, according to us the judgment of
the High Court under appeal is neither perverse nor illegal
and does not call for any interference, since it is based on
correct appreciation of evidence on record and proper
application of law to the established facts. The appeals
are accordingly dismissed, but in the circumstances of the
case there shall be no order as to cost.