LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

PAINDER SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 572 · Decided: 08-08-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA · Disposal: Dismissed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
PAINDER SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA ETC. ETC. 
AUGUST 8, 1995 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.) 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 : 
S. 23(1)-<:ompensation-Award of-<:ircular fixing value of land 
C under S.48 of Stamp Act-Relevance of in the context of award of compen-
sation under Land Acquisition Act. 
A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 
acquiring a large extent of land for development of Delhi city was publish-
ed on 6th April, 1964. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation 
D 
@Rs. 5,000 and Rs 4,500 per bigha. On reference, the Civil Court, en-
hanced it to Rs. 7,260 and Rs. 7,000 per bigha respectively. On appeal, the 
High Court uniformly enhanced the market value to Rs. 12,000 per bigha. 
Hence these Special Leave petitions. 
E 
F 
The petitioners contended that for the adjacent lands in village 
Badarpur and Molarband, the Reference Court and the High Court en-
hanced the compensation to Rs. 43,000 per bigha etc. and so High Court 
was not justified in confining the market value to Rs. 12,000 per bigha. 
Dismissing the Special Leave Petitions, this Court 
HELD : 1. Reliance was placed on the circular issued obviously 
under Section 48 of the Stamp Act, by the Central Government fixing the 
market value for the purpose of registration at Rs. 60 per sq. yard. This 
Court has considered the entire gamut of the operation of the relevant 
G 
provisions of Stamp Act and S.23(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and held 
that the fixation by the Government of the amount under Stamp Act for 
fiscal purpose bears no relevance to determine the market value under 
Section 23(1) of the Act. The claimant aliunde needs to establish the 
prevailing market value as on the date of the notification under Section 
4(1) by adduction of evidence to prove that the acquired land and the land 
H 
covered by sale transactions bear similar or same potentialities or ad-
572 
PAINDERSINGH v. U.O.I. 
573 
vantageous features. The courts below have relied only on the circular A 
issued by the Government for fiscal purpose, viz., for stamp duty. The 
contra view taken by the High Court in that behalf is clearly illegal and 
the same cannot form basis for further enhancement. [574-A-D] 
2. The judgment of the High Court in relation to the notification 
dated 5th July, 1973 in which the compensation was awarded @Rs. 68,000 
per bigha for village Tughlakabad, is of little assistance as it is also 
founded upon the circular issued by the Government on 26th March, 1966 
and relates to a noti.fication issued after about 10 years of the notification 
at hand. [574-E] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C) 
No. 32 of 1990. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.8.89 of the Delhi High Court 
in RF.A. No. 52 of 1989. 
L.C. Chechi and Serva Mitter for the Petitioners. 
Ms. Indra Sawhney for S.A. Matto for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
The notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 
1894 (for short, 'the Act') acquiring a large extent of land for development 
B 
c 
D 
E 
of Delhi city was published on 6th April, 1964. The Land Acquisition 
Officer awarded compensation @Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 4,500 per bigha by his 
award No. 87of1980-81. On reference, the Civil Court, viz., the Additional 
District Judge, enhanced it by his award and decree dated 30th August, 
F 
1983 to Rs. 7,260 and Rs. 7,000 per bigha respectively. On appeal, the High 
Court by the impugned judgment dated 22nd August, 1989 made in RF.A. 
No. 52/89 and batch uniformly enhanced the market value to Rs. 12,000 
per bigha. Feeling aggrieved, this petition has been filed for further enhan-
cement to Rs. 25,000 per bigha. 
G 
The learned counsel for the petitioners states that these lands relate 
to village Madanpur Khadar. He contends that for the adjacent lands in 
village Badarpur and Molarband, the Reference Court and the High Court 
enhanced the compensation to Rs. 43,000 per bigha etc. Therefore, the 
High Court was not justified in confining the market value to Rs. 12,000 H 
574 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
per bigha. 
We have gone through the judgments in those cases. Reliance was 
placed on the circular, issued obviously under Section 48 of the Stamp Act, 
by the Central Government fixing the market value for the purpose of 
registration at Rs. 60 per sq. yard. This Court has considered the entire 
B 
gamut of the operation of the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.