MEHRAWAL KHEWAJI TRUST (REGO.), FARIDKOT & ORS. versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

Citation: [2012] 4 S.C.R. 24 · Decided: 27-04-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 7 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
[2012] 4 S.C.R. 24 
MEHRAWAL KHEWAJI TRUST (REGO.), FARIDKOT & 
ORS. 
V. 
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 4005 of 2012) 
APRIL 27, 2012 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND J. CHELAMESWAR, JJ.) 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 
Compensation - Interest on solatium and additional 
market value -
Sale exempl<:irs - Annual increase -
Deduction - Held: When there are several exemplars with 
reference to similar lands, it is the general rule that the 
o highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied that it is a bona fide 
transaction, has to be considered and accepted - It is not 
desirable to take an average of various sale deeds placed 
before the authority/court for fixing fair compensation - Sale 
exemplar being of 21'2 years prior to s.4 Notification in the 
E instant case, annual increase is fixed at 12% - However, the 
exemplar being of a smaller plot, a 20% deduction will be 
allowed from the market value - Compensation awarded 
accordingly - Claimant shall also be entitled to other statutory 
benefits including interest on solatium and additional market 
value. 
F 
The subject land admeasuring 33 acres, was 
acquired in terms of Notification dated 22.12.1979 uls 4 
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act). Dissatisfied 
by the award dated 27.10.1982, passed by the Collector, 
G the appellants filed an application for reference uls 18 of 
the Act. The reference court enhanced the compensation 
to Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. The High Court declined to 
interfere. 
H 
24 
MEHRAWAL KHEWAJI TRUST (REGO.), FARIDKOT 
25 
& ORS. v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
In the instant appeals, the appellants claimed A 
compensation in terms of higher exemplar, namely, Ext. 
A-61, instead of averaging the prices, and interest on 
solatium. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
B 
HELD: 1.1 The reference court failed to take note of 
the highest exemplar, namely, the sale transaction under 
Ext. A-61 dated 22.07.1977. When the land is being 
compulsorily taken away from a person, he is entitled to 
the highest value which similar land in the locality is C 
shown to have fetched in a bona fide transaction entered 
into between a willing purchaser and a willing seller near 
about the time of the acquisition. When there are several 
exemplars with reference to similar lands, it is the general 
rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied that D 
it is a bona fide transaction, has to be considered and 
accepted. It is not desirable to take an average of various 
sale deeds placed before the authority/court for fixing fair 
compensation. Therefore, the market value as per Ext.A-
61dated22.07.1977 was Rs. 1,39,130.43 per acre (approx. 
E 
Rs.1.40 lakhs per acre). The said sale deed was two and 
a half years prior in time than s. 4(1) notification dated 
22.12.1979. There is no reason to eschew the above sale 
transaction. It is also pointed out that the lands covered 
under Ext.A-61 are nearer to the lands of the appellants 
F 
under acquisition. [para 12 and 15] [32-C-D] 
Sri Rani M. Vijayalakshmamma Rao Bahadur, Ranee 
of Vuyyur vs. Collector of Madras, (1969) 1 MLJ 45 (SC); 
State of Punjab and Another vs. Hansraj (Dead) by LRS. 
G 
Sohan Singh and Others, (1994) 5 SCC 734; Anjani Molu 
Oessai vs. State of Goa and Another 2010 (14) SCR 997 = 
(2010) 13 sec 710 - relied on. 
1.2 This Court has time and again granted 10% to 
15% increase per annum. The annual increase is fixed at H 
26 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 4 S.C.R. 
A 
12% per annum and with that rate of increase, the market 
value of the appellants' land would come to Rs.1,82,000 
per acre as on the date of notification. [para 16) [32-G; 33-
C] 
8 
Ranjit Singh vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh (1992) 3 
SCC 659; Delhi Development Authority vs. Bali Ram Sharma 
& Ors. (2004) 6 SCC 533; ONGC Ltd. vs. Rameshbhai 
Jivanbhai Patel 2008 (11) SCR 927 = (2008) 14 SCC 7 45; 
Union of India vs. Harpat Singh & Ors. (2009) 14 SCC 375 -
C relied on 
1.3 The exemplar Ext.A-61 dated 22.07 .1977 is quite 
reasonable and acceptable. However, considering the 
fact that the area of land under Ext. A-61 dated 22.07.1977 
is a smaller one, it is but proper that appropriate 
D deduction should be made for the same. Thus, the market 
value for the acquired land is fixed at Rs.1,82,000/- minus 
Rs.36,400/- (towards 20% deduction) equivalent to 
Rs.1,45,600/- rounded at Rs.1,45,000/- per acre which is 
quite fair, reasonable and acceptable. [para 17) [33-F, H; 
E 
34-A] 
Trisha/a Jain & Anr. vs. State of Utt
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.