01Facts
The appellant’s land at Village Wanwadi, Taluka Haveli, measuring 115 sq. metres, was acquired for road widening.
p. 2The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at ₹261 per sq. metre, which the claimant considered inadequate and sought a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
p. 2The Reference Court dismissed the claim for enhancement.
In appeal, the claimant relied on photocopies of sale deeds, a valuer’s opinion, evidence concerning an auction sale, and a chart of valuation rates prepared by the Assistant Director of Town Planning.
pp. 3–6The State adduced no evidence.
p. 302Issues
i.1. Whether the claimant established a basis for enhancing the compensation awarded for the acquired land
p. 2ii.2. Whether the evidence adduced by the claimant was sufficient and legally admissible to establish the land’s market value
pp. 3–603Law Applied
Under Section 51-A of the Land Acquisition Act, a certified copy of a registered document, or a copy supplied under Section 57 of the Registration Act, may be accepted as evidence of the transaction recorded in it; the court may draw a rebuttable presumption as to its contents.
pp. 4–5In Cement Corporation of India Ltd. v. Purya, (2004) 8 SCC 270, the Supreme Court addressed proof of sale instances and the application of Section 51-A.
p. 4Expert valuation evidence must be supported by relevant and genuine material.
p. 5In Jawajee Nagnatham v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad, (1994) 4 SCC 595, the Supreme Court held that valuation rates prepared for stamp-duty purposes cannot, by themselves, determine market value for land-acquisition compensation.
p. 6The market value is to be assessed as at the relevant date of the Section 4 notification.
p. 4Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Registration Act, 1908 Section 57
04Reasoning
The sale-deed copies were not certified copies and therefore did not qualify for the evidentiary treatment under Section 51-A; the Court declined to rely on them.
pp. 4–5The valuer had not examined sale deeds or produced the materials underlying his estimate, making his opinion unsupported.
p. 5The witness concerning the auction sale produced no supporting document, so the Court could not assess its proximity in time or location.
p. 6Finally, the Town Planning chart contained rates prepared for stamp-duty purposes and was not a proper basis for determining market value under Jawajee Nagnatham.
p. 6The Court therefore found no reliable evidence warranting enhancement.
pp. 6–705Holding
The Court held that the claimant had not proved entitlement to enhanced compensation and found no basis to interfere with the Reference Court’s decision.
p. 7The appeal was dismissed without an order as to costs.
p. 7Original Court PDF
Prithvinath KaulvsThe State Of Maharashtra And Anr.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
