LexGOA HOUSING BOARD versus RAMESHCHANDRA GOVIND PAWASKAR & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R.-735 GOA HOUSING BOARD v. RAMESHCHANDRA GOVIND PAWASKAR & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 8540 of 2011) OCTOBER 11, 2011 [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, P. SATHASIVAM AND A.K. PATNAIK JJ.] Goa Land Use (Regulation) Act, 1991: Object of its enactment - Discussed. · ss.2, 13 - Compensation - Determination of - A B c Acquisition of 358730 sq.m. of land - LAO determined compensation @ Rs. 18 per sq.m. which was affirmed by reference court - High Court awarded Rs.100 per sq.m. as D compensation - On appeal, held: The acquired land vested in the respondent who was the tenant under the provisions of the Tenancy Act, therefore, the respondent could not have used the land for any purpose other than agriculture or even allow anyone else to use the same for any purpose other than E agriculture - In view of permanent restriction regarding user and the bar in regard to any non-agricultural use, the acquired land would have to be valued only as an agricultural land and · could not be valued with reference to sales statistics of other nearby lands which had the potential of being used for urban F development - Merely by notifying the regional plan showing certain agricultural lands as earmarked for industrial purpose, those lands would not cease to be agricultural lands - At least 50% would have to be deducted from market value of freehold land with development potential to arrive 13t market value of G such land which could be used only for agricultural purposes - Market value of neighbouring land being Rs.1101- per sq.m., appropriate compensation for acquired land would be 50% 735 H 736 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011) 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A thereof, that is Rs.55 per sq.m. - Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964. Land acquisition - Compensation - Determination of, in respect of similarly situated land in the same area - Held: Similarly situated land in the same area, having the same 8 advantages and acquired under the same notification should be awarded the same compensation - But if an acquired land is subject to a statutory covenant that it can be used only for agriculture and cannot be used for any other purpose necessarily it will have to be sold as agricultural land as the C land owner cannot sell it for any purpose other than agriculture and the purchaser cannot sell it for any purpose other than agriculture. Land acquisition - Vacant land vis-a-vis land in D possession of long term lessee - Compensation - Determination of. The Respondent was declared as the tenant of land measuring 374,000 sq. mts. under the Goa, Daman and E Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964. On payment of the purchase price of Rs.59,980 determined under sections 18C and 180 of the Tenancy Act, a purchase certificate was issued to him under section 18H of the Tenancy Act confirming that he was deemed to be the purchaser of the said land under the provisions of the Tenancy Act, F subject to the condition that the said land shall not be transferred without the previous sanction of the Mamlatdar under section 18K of the Tenancy Act. An extent of 358730 sq.m. of land belonging to the respondent was acquired in pursuance of the preliminary G notification. The LAO made an award determining the compensation payable as Rs.18 per sq.m. The reference court declared the compensation awarded at Rs.18 per H sq.m. to be reasonable and affirmed the award of the GOA HOUSING BOARD v. RAMESHCHANDRA 737 GOVIND PAWASKAR LAO. Aggrieved, the respondent filed an appeal before the A High Court seeking increase in compensation. The High Court found that in regard to the adjoining land acquired under the same notification, compensation was awarded @ Rs.136.50 per sq.m. and as the land in Survey No.102/ 1 belonging to the landholder was much larger, the'High B Court deducted Rs.36.50 per sq.m. and awarded Rs.100 per sq.m. as the compensation. Both the Board and the landowners filed the appeals challenging the order of the High Court. Disposing of the appeals, the Court c HELD: 1.1. Having regard to section 2 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964, it is clear that notwithstanding anything contained in the Town and Country Planning Act or any scheme thereunder or the D Land Revenue Code, no land which is vested in a tenant under the provisions of the Tenancy Act shall be used or allowed to be used for any purpose other than agriculture. In the instant case, the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.