LexPRITHVI RAJ TANEJA versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
j
633
PRITHVI RAJ TANEJA
A
v.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
lanuary 18, 1977
[H. R. KHANNA, R. S. SARKARIA AND JASWANT SINGH, JJ.]
B
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S. 23-Compulsory acquisition
of land-
Whether price paid for small plots a criterion for determining compensation for
vast areas-Assesmient of market value, when to remain undisturbed.
The appellant's land was acquired and compensation was awarded to him
by the Land Acq.uisition Officer. Demanding a· higher amount, the appellant
had the matter referred to the District Judge who increased the award, but still
C
discontented, the appellant went in appeal. The High Court also increased the
compensation but could not satisfy the appellant who thereupon obtained leave
to appeal to the Supreme Court, contending that small plots of land adjoining
his l'arge area were sold at much higher rates·.
Dismising the appeal, the Court,
HEID : 1. The price paid for small plots of land cannot provide a safe
critarion for determining the amount of compensation for a vast area of land.
D
The large area of land cannot possibly fetch a price at the same rate at which
small plots are sold. [635 A-Bl
Smt. Padma Uppal etc. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
[19.77]
1 S.C.R. 329,
applied.
·
2. The essential thing is to keep in view the r~levant factors prescribed by
the Act. If the judgment of the High Court reveals that it ·has taken into
consideration the relevant factors, the assessment of the market value of the
E
acquired land should not be disturbed. [635 D-E]
Thakur Kanta Prasad Singh (dead) by L. Rs v. State of Bihar A.I.R. 1976
S.C. 2219, applied.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1827 of 1970.
(From the Judgment andl Decree dated 28-4-1970 of the Madhya
Pradesh High Court (Gwalior Bench) in First Appeal No.
133 of
1968).
S .. N. Andley' and Uma Dutta, for the appellants
Ram Panjwani and H. S. Harihar, for the respondents.
F
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
G
KHANNA, J. This is an appeal on certificate by Prithvi Raj Taneja
{now deceased and represented by his legal representatives)
against
the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court whereby the High
Court partially accepted the appeal filed by the appellant regarding
the quantum of compensation for the acquisition of land.
H
'
A plot of land measuring 27 bighas: and 17 biswas situated in
Ashok Nagar, district Guna, belonging to the appellant was acquired
for the construction of a police station and resid~ntial quarters fo1•
634
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1977] 2 S.C.R.
A
policemen. A bigha, it is stated, i~ equivalent to 2,500 square yards.
The land sought to be acquired measured 68,658 square yards. Noti-
fication under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for the acquisi-
tion of the Janel was issued on April 7, 1961. The Land Acquisition
Officer' as per award dated June 13, 1961 awarded compensation for
the land at the rate o~ Rs. 100 per bigha. In addition to that, he
awarded a sum of Rs. 1,175 for large trees and Rs. 1,380 for small
B
trees standing on the Jan'd. The appellant was also awarded Rs. 1,000
as compensation for a well which had been sunk in the land, and
Rs. 800 for a house standing on the land. In all, the appellant was
awarded a sum of Rs. 7,616 including solatium at the rate of fifteen
per cent by ,the Land Acquisition Officer.
The appellant wanted compensation for. the land at the rate of
c
Rs. 10 per square yard.
He accordingly had the matter referred to
the District Judge.
Learned Additional District Judge
determined
the market value of the land in question to be Rs. 900 per bigha.
Regarding the well, the Additional District Judge awarded compensa-
tion of Rs. 3,000 as against the amount of Rs. 1,000 which had been
awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. In other respects, the
award of the Land Acquisition Officer was upheld.
Computing sola-
D
tium at the rate of 10 .per cent, the total amount awarded by District
Judge to the appellant was Rs. 32,285 besides interest at the rate of
six pe1• cent per annum.
E
F
G
H
The appellant not being satisfied with the award of the Additional
Distiict Judge took the matter in appeal to the High Court. The
High Court awarded compensation to the appellant at the rate of Re. 1
per square yard for the land in question.
The High Court also
awarded Rs. 2,500 for the Joss of earnings to the appellant. Tl;le rate
of solatium for compulsory acquisition was Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.