BHAG SINGH AND ORS. versus UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH

Citation: [1992] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 457 · Decided: 08-09-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L.M. SHARMA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

• 
BHAG SINGH AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH 
SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 
[L.M. SHARMA, S. MOHAN AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
B 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 
Section 23--Market value-Enhancement of-Large number of cases 
already decided by Courts-Subsequent judgment fixing higher market value C 
for lands in the vicinity-Whether could be acted upon to grant higher 
compensation. 
The petitioner's lands were acquired and they were granted compen-
sation by the Reference Court. For enhancement of compensation, the 
petitioners filed appeals/cross-objections before the High Court. By a D 
common judgment the High Court enhanced the compensation. The High 
Court also dismissed the appeals preferred by the State Government for 
reduction in the amounts of compensation awarded by the Reference 
Court. Not satisfied with the quantum of enhancement, the petitioners 
preferred the present Special Leave petitions against the High Court's 
orders. 
E 
On behalf of the petitioners it was contend.ed that in a subsequent 
judgment the High Court has awarded higher market value for land 
similar to the acquired lands and on that basis the compensation has to 
be enhanced in respect of the acquired lands belonging to the petitioners. F 
The Respondent contested the appeal on the ground that the judg-
ment of the High Court relied on by the Petitioners related to a stray case 
and it should not be allowed to disturb the uniform rate of market value 
rIXed by the High Court in a number of cases and has become final. 
Dismissing the Special Leave Petitions, this Court, 
HELD: 1.1. No doubt, a judgment of a Court in a land acquisition 
case determining the market value of a land in the vicinity of the acquired 
land, even though not inter parties, could be admitted in evidence either 
G 
as an instance or one from which the market value of the acquired land H 
457 
458 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS[1992] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
could be deduced or inferred. There will be no difficulty in accepting such 
judgment as one furnishing the basis for determining the market value of 
the acquired land under consideration, if the opposite parties do not 
genuinely dispute the position that the judgment relied upon, could be 
acted as basis for determination of the market value of the acquired land. 
B 
c 
[ 461 G-H; 462 A-C] 
1.2. However, it is unsafe to act on a subsequent stray judgment of 
a High Court in a land acquisition case to disturb its earlier large number 
of judgments, where uniform rate of market value of the acquired lands in 
same vicinity are fixed. 
Krapa Rangiah v. Special Duty Collector, Land Acquisition, [1982) 2 
sec 374, distinguished. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C) 
D Nos. 7368-7390 of 1980. 
From the Judgments and Orders dated 8.3.1979, 27.3.1979 and 
9.5.1979 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Regular First Appeal 
Nos. 477n6, 473176, 474176, 471!76, 570177, 455176, 475/76, 569/77, 469176, 
842/78, 1053178, 653/77, 4/74, 461/74, 96/76, 99176, 152/78, 100/76, 97/76, 
E 
101/76, 472/76, 478/76 and 476 of 1976. 
WITH 
S.L.P. (C) Nos. 7416-7427, 7393, 7399 and 5054 of 1980. 
F 
Ujjagar Singh, D.V. Sehgal, A.S. Chahal, B. Kanta Rao, Virnal Dave, 
G 
Ms. Neelam Kalsi, Ranbir Singh Yadav, G.K. Bansal, Ms. Lily Thomas, Raj 
Birbal and R.S. Suri for the appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
VENKATACHALA, J. These Special Leave Petitions being those 
directed against judgments of one and the same Division Bench of the High 
Court of Punjab and Haryana by which market value of lands of the 
petitioners acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 
1894 (for short 'the Act') has been determined on common materials and 
H considerations, they could be disposed of by this common judgment. 
BHAG SINGH v. U.T. CHANDIGARH [VENKATACHALA, J.] 
459 
We shall first deal with SLP (C) Nos. 7368-7376, 7379-7390, 7393 and A 
7399 of 1980 directed against one of the common judgments of the High 
Court as the decision in them will suffice for disposal of the remaining 
Special Leave Petitions where common questions arise for consideration. 
Petitioners were either the appellants or cross objectors in the ap-
peals before the High Court. As they were not satisfied with the amounts 
of compensation awarded for their acquired lands by the Court of District 
Judge at Chandigarh, on references received by it under Section 18 of the 
Act, grant of a higher compensation was sought by them
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.