LexMANOHAR AND OTHERS versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 7 S.C.R. 1675 : 2025 INSC 900 Manohar and Others v. The State of Maharashtra & Others (Civil Appeal No. 9870 of 2025) 28 July 2025 [B.R. Gavai,* CJI and Augustine George Masih, J.] Issue for Consideration Whether the impugned judgment passed by the High Court dismissing the First Appeals filed by the Appellants-farmers is sustainable or not. Headnotes† Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Grant of compensation – Highest exemplar sale deed – Benefit of, ought to be given to the Appellants – Appellants’ land and other adjoining lands were acquired under the 1961 Act for the establishment of Jintur Industrial Area – LAO awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,800/- per Acre – Appellants sought enhancement of compensation – Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 32,000/- per Acre however, ignored the highest exemplar sale deed showing market value of Rs. 72,900/- per Acre relied upon by the Appellants – First Appeal filed by Appellants, dismissed by High Court – Interference with: Held: When there are several exemplars with reference to similar land, usually the highest of the exemplars, which is a bona-fide transaction, will be considered – The highest exemplar sale deed showing market value of Rs. 72,900/- per Acre, available at Sr. No.4 and relied upon by the Appellants as a bona-fide sale instance was completely overlooked by the Reference Court – Though, the High Court recorded that the Reference Court considered in all ten exemplars and that it did not consider the sale instance at Sr. No.4 which is from Jintur, however, it took a diametrically opposite view that the Reference Court had considered the sale instance at Sr. No.4 since they are found nearby to the notification under the 1961 Act – Such finding recorded by the * Author 1676 [2025] 7 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports High Court is erroneous – Impugned judgment not sustainable – Sale exemplar at Sr. No.4 is the most proximate to the date of transaction – Land of the Appellants was situated in a prime location and they deserve the benefit of the highest sale exemplar – However, on facts, the Reference Court rightly applied a deduction of 20% in the price determined – Thus, while accepting the sale exemplar at Sr. No.4, having market value of Rs. 72,900/- per Acre, a deduction of 20% i.e., Rs. 14,580/- per Acre is applied – Compensation granted to the Appellants enhanced from Rs. 32,000/- per Acre to Rs. 58,320/- per Acre with all other consequential benefits, as directed. [Paras 22, 25, 26, 28, 33, 50, 51] Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 – Potential value of the land to be considered – Appellants’ land and other adjoining lands were acquired under the 1961 Act for the establishment of Jintur Industrial Area – Respondent No.3-Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation contended that the Courts below rightly excluded the sale exemplar at Serial No. 4 on account of it being of an abnormally high value: Held: Contention rejected – The compensation payable to the owner of the land is determined by reference to the price which a seller might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser– Also, the land acquired has to be valued not only with reference to its condition at the time of notification u/s.4, LA Act but its potential value must be taken into account – Thus, the sale deeds of lands situated in the vicinity and the comparable benefits and advantages which they have, provide a ready method of computing the market value – In the present case, the sale exemplar at Sr. No.4 i.e., the sale instance dated 31st March 1990, is the most proximate to the date of transaction – Further, the sale instances at Sr. Nos.9 and 10, from Jintur, show that after the notice under the 1961 Act, there has been a very high rise in the prices of the land in the nearby areas – Land of the Appellants was situated in a prime location and they deserve the benefit of the highest sale exemplar. [Para 41] Land Acquisition – Compensation – Method of computation – Plea of the Respondent No.3-Corporation that the Reference Court rightly used the principle of averaging of sale price of sale exemplars at Sr. Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 for determination of market value of acquired land: [2025] 7 S.C.R. 1677 Manohar and Others v. The State of Maharashtra & Others Held: Not accepted – In the event, the values of the sale instan
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.