PADMA UPPAL ETC. versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 329 · Decided: 23-08-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.N. RAY · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

329 
PADMA UPPAL r:rc. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. 
August 23, 1976 
[A. N. RAY, C.J., M. H. BEG AND JASWANT SINGH, JJ.] 
Land acquisition-Fixing compensation-When the Sup,,me Court coufd 
interfere. 
Procedure-When a Court of appeal can interfere in the lower court's judg-
ment. 
In respect of a vast area of land, partly urban and partly rural, 
adjoining 
each other, acquired by the State Government the Collector classified a part of 
it as potential building area and part as agricultural land and fixed a slightly 
higher rate of compensation for the former and a lower rate for the latter. 
Accepting the classification, the Senior Sub-Judge tq whom the determination of 
compensation was referred enhanced the compensation in respect of both classes 
of land. In appeal, the High C<;mrt further enhanced the compensation of both 
classes of !Md. In further appeal to this Court, it was contended that since 
the whole of the la.nd in question formed one consolidation block, the entire 
area should have been treated as potential building area and compens,.tion fixed 
on the basis of the market value. 
DismiMi!li the appeals, 
HELD : In an appeal from an award granting compensation, this Court 
should npt interfere unless there is a wrong application of any well·settled prin-
ciple or unless there is something to show not merely that on the balance of 
evidence it is possible to reach a different conclusien but that the judgmant can-
not be supported by reMOn of 11. wrong application of a. principle or because 
some important point affecting valuation has bee11 overlooked or misapplied. 
There is a prudent condition to which the appellate power, generally speaking 
is subject, namely that a court of appeal interferes not when the judgment 
under attack is not right but only when it is shown to be wrong. [333 Fl 
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, 
Bangalore v. T. A.dinarayan Setty 
[1959] Sopp. 1 S.C.R. 404. Dattatrayaya Shankarbhat A.mbalgi & Ors. v. The 
Collector of Sho/apur & A.nr. [1971] 3 S.C.C. 43 and The Dollar Company, 
· Madras v. Collector of Madras [1975] 2 S.C.C. 730 referred to. 
In case of acquisition of several plots of land which constitute one block 
comprising of agricultl,lral land and potenti~l building area, the principle of belt-
ing has no application. 
As mch the erstwhile proprietors of the plots cannot 
be granted compensation for the agricultural land at the same rate at which 
compensation is determined in respect of potential building a.rea which is better 
situate and possesses far greater advantages. 
[332 G] 
Mirza NMusherwan Khan & Anr. v. The Collector (L1Jnd Acquisition) Hydera-
bad [1975] 1 S.C.C. !38 applied. 
CIVIL APPEALS Nos. 2694-2695, 2697-2700 and 2703-2704/72. 
Appeals from the Judgment and Order dated 3-1-68 of the Punjab 
and Haryana High Court in Regular First Appeal Nos. 190-193, 195-
198/62. 233 and 234/64 and 
CIVIL APPEALS Nos. 2694-2695, 2697-2700 and 2703-2704/72. 
Appeals from the Judgment and Order dated 3-1-68 of the Punjab 
& Haryana High Court in R.F.A. 
Nos. 
192-193 
195-198 and 
233-234/62. 
' 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
.B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
330 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1977) 1 S.C.R. 
S. T. Desai (In C. As. 2394-2397 of 1972), F. S. Nariman (In 
C.As: 2398 to 2402/72, Naunitla/ and Miss Lalita Kohli for the Appel-
lants Ill C.As. 2394-2403/72 and for Respondents in C.As. 2-094-2695 
2697-2700. and 2703-2704/72. 
. 
' 
0. P. Sharma for the Appellant in C.As. 2694-2695, 2697-2700 
and 2703-2704/72 and for the Respondents in C.As. 2394-2403/72. 
The Judgment of the Court w~s delivered by 
]ASWANT SINGH, J.-This batch of 18 appeals Nos. 2394 to 2403 
. of 1972 and 2694, 2695, 2697 to 2700, 2703 and 2704 pf 1972 by 
certificates granted under Article 133(1) (a) of tbe Constitution which 
arise out of acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 
1894 (Act No. 1 of 1894) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and 
are directed against the common judgment dated January 3, 1969 of 
tbe High Court of Punjab and Ha.ryana shall be disposed of by this 
judgment. · While the first group of ten appeals Nos. 2394 to 2403 of 
1972 are by the erstwhile proprietors of land claiming enhancement of 
·the compensation awarded to them by the High Court, the rest of !he 
eight appeals are by tbe State of Punjab challenging the quantum of 
compensation as enhanced by the High Court. 
It appears that a vast area of land measuring 832 kanals and 2 
marlas (i.e. 416050 sq.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.