Market value must remain consistent for contiguous acquisitions in the same village serving the same public purpose.

The State of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (“1894 Act”) on 13 April 2010 for acquiring 23.77 acres in Village Rathdhana, District Sonepat, for construction of a road between Sectors 32 and 33, Sonipat.

A declaration under Section 6 followed on 11 April 2011. The Land Acquisition Collector, by award dated 15 March 2013, assessed the market value at ₹80,00,000 per acre.

The landowners sought references under Section 18 of the 1894 Act. The Reference Court, by award dated 17 August 2019, enhanced the market value to ₹86,60,000 per acre, relying principally on sale deed dated 30 April 2008, comprising 1 kanal 15 marlas of land, marked Ex. P-1.

The landowners appealed seeking further enhancement, while the State filed appeals seeking reduction of the compensation.

Whether the market value of the acquired land should be assessed at the rate of ₹1,29,47,200 per acre, consistently with the High Court’s earlier decision concerning contemporaneous acquisition in the same village and for the same purpose?

Whether the Reference Court ought to have relied upon sale deed Ex. R-5 dated 11 March 2009, instead of sale deed Ex. P-1 dated 30 April 2008, for determining the market value?

Whether the appeals filed by the landowners for enhancement and by the State for reduction of compensation were liable to be allowed or dismissed?

The Court exercised appellate jurisdiction under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, over the awards passed by the Reference Court.

The acquisition and determination of compensation were governed by Sections 4, 6 and 18 of the 1894 Act.

Market value is ordinarily assessed by reference to comparable sale exemplars, having regard to factors such as location, size, proximity, date of sale and the need for appropriate deductions.

The Court referred to Lal Chand v. Union of India, (2009) 15 SCC 769, in support of considering a relevant and proximate sale instance for valuation purposes.

It also applied the binding effect and persuasive relevance of its earlier decision in RFA No. 395 of 2020, where the market value for a contemporaneous acquisition in the same area and for the same public purpose was fixed at ₹1,29,47,200 per acre after applying escalation and a 20% deduction to the comparable sale instance.

The Court additionally noted that the State’s challenge to that decision had been dismissed by the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 46370 of 2023 on 22 July 2024.

The Court found that the two acquisitions were substantially comparable: both notifications were issued around the same period, concerned land in Village Rathdhana and adjoining villages, and related to construction of a sectoral road.

In the earlier decision, the High Court had assessed the market value at ₹1,29,47,200 per acre after considering comparable sale deeds, applying a 12% annual escalation and a 20% deduction for location and development factors.

Although the State relied on Ex. R-5, the Court held that there was no justification for disregarding Ex. P-1, which was situated approximately six acres from the acquired land, particularly when the earlier valuation decision had determined the market value for a similar acquisition in the same vicinity.

Applying consistency in valuation and taking into account the earlier decision, which had survived challenge before the Supreme Court, the Court held that the acquired land should not be valued at a different rate.

The landowners’ appeals were allowed to that extent, while the State’s appeals seeking reduction were dismissed.

Pending applications, if any, were also disposed of.