A.P. HOUSING BOARD versus K. MANOHAR REDDY & ORS.

Citation: [2010] 11 S.C.R. 1107 · Decided: 30-09-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 11 S.C.R. 1107 
A.P. HOUSING BOARD 
V. 
K. MANOHAR REDDY & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 4212-4223 of 2004) 
SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND ANIL 
R. DAVE, JJ.] 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894- ss. 4, 6, 18, 54 and 23(1)(A) 
A 
B 
- Acquisition of large tract of land -
Compensation -
C 
Determination of - High Court enhanced rate of market value 
of the acquired land from Rs. 50 per square yard to Rs. 75 
per square yard from which 113rd would be deducted - On 
appeal, held: Acquired land is agricultural land, thus, would 
require extensive development to be utilised as a residential 
D 
site - Deduction of 113rd from the awarded amount would be 
an appropriate deduction towards development charges -
Sale deeds were executed in proximity to the date of 
acquisition, thus, rate of market value enhanced by High Court 
without giving cogent reasons, not valid and legal - Thus, 
E 
market value of land determined at the rate of Rs. 501- per 
sq. yard as on date of notification and 113rd to be deducted 
towards development charges f _m the awarded amount. 
A Notification was issued to acquire land measuring 
84 acres 24 guntas. The Land Acquisition Officer passed 
an award determining the market value of the land at the 
rate of Rs. 36,000/- per acre. The civil court fixed the 
market value of the land acquired at the rate of Rs. 50/-
F 
per square yard; and also awarded 30% solatium on the 
market value and a sum of 12% additional value in terms 
G 
of s. 23(1)(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High 
Court held that the claimants were entitled to 
compensation of Rs. 75/- per square yard for the acquired 
lands, and after deducting 1/3rd from the said amount, it 
1107 
H 
1108 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010) 11 S.C.R. 
A would be at the rate of Rs. 50/- per square yard, alongwith 
other benefits awarded by the civil court. Therefore, the . 
appellant filed the instant appeals. 
B 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The land which is acquired is very ideal 
and suitably located, there being a court house and bus 
stand in proximity to the acquired land. There is also 
evidence on record indicating that the acquired land is 
abutting the main highway. Therefore, the acquired land 
C has potential value to be properly used and developed 
even for housing project or to exploit it for commercial 
purposes. The acquired land, although classified as 
agricultural land, could always be converted to land of 
good quality by making investments like filling up of the 
D land, providing road, sewage system and other civic 
amenities. Therefore, the land having such potential 
value could be converted to a land of good quality by 
investing money towards its development. [Para 9) [1114-
C-E] 
E 
1.2 Whatever could 
be 
deducted towards 
development charges for developing a particular plot of 
land could range between 20 per cent to 75 per cent. This 
is a very wide bracket but an appropriate deduction 
befitting the situation, location and the nature of the tand 
F justifying the deduction made could be arrived at upon 
estimation of all the said factors. If the land is already 
developed and could be used as a commercial/residential 
plot, what should be deducted would be in the lower side 
whereas if development is to be made, like filling up of 
G the land, providing of roads, sewage and other civic 
amenities, etc., the range of the deduction could be 
higher. [Para 17) [1121-E-F] 
1.3 Considering the facts and circumstances of the 
H instant case, and the situation of the land, what could be 
A.P. HOUSING BOARD v. K. MANO HAR REDDY & 1109 
ORS. 
an appropriate deduction is 1/3rd from the awarded 
A 
amount towards development charges. The evidence 
adduced in the instant case shows that the land is 
agricultural land and, therefore, would require extensive 
development to be utilised as a residential site. [Para 18] 
[1121-G-H; 1122-A] 
B 
1.4 The High Court interfered with the rate of market 
value fixed by the reference court and raised it to Rs. 75/ 
- per square yard from Rs. 50/- per square yard as fixed 
by the reference court and thereafter, deducted 1/3rd 
C 
from the said rate towards the development charges. 
However, the High Court did not given any reason, let 
alone cogent reasons, for increasing the said rate from 
Rs. 50/- to Rs. 75/-. Such a course was also not 
permissible in view of the clear evidence which was 
relied upon and exhibited by the claimants-respondents 
themselves, pres

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.