LexRAVINDER NARAIN AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B RA VINDER NARAIN AND ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA FEBRUARY 28, 2003 [DORAISWAMY RAJU AND ARIJIT PASAYAT, JJ.] Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Sections 23, 24 and 25-Acquisition of · Land-Compensation-Criteria for valuation of land-Held, where large area C is subject matter of acquisition, rates at which small plots are sold cannot be said to be a safe criteria-The value of the potentiality of the land is to be determined on such materials as are available and not under imagination- Principle of fixation of market value with reference to comparable sale is that when sale is within reasonable time of the date of notification, it should be bonafide transaction, value should be of land acquired or of the aqjacent D land and it should possess similar advantages. Lands were acquired under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Land Ac9uisition Officer fixed different market value for the land in different areas and fixed the compensation. In reference and in appeal High Court ' enhanced the compensation. While fixing the market value of the lands E references were made to several instances of sale contemporaneous to the period. High Court felt that residential plots and shop plots had to be sold at different rates and their average was worked out to fix the compensation. High Court also made reference to various data provided by way of evidence and concluded th'.:t the total plotable areas cannot be F taken into account and only the plotted areas have to be reckoned. It also took note of the development charges, miscellaneous charges on account of brokerage, administration, interest on investment etc. and worked out the net price to fix the market value. Hence the present appeal~. G H Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. Where large area is the subject matter of acquisition, rate at which small plots are sold cannot be said to be a safe criteria. It cannot, however, be laid down as an absolute proposition that the rates fixed for the small plots cannot be the bisis for fixation of the rate. (428-A, C) 424 \ .... RAVINDER NARAIN v. U.0.1. 425 The Collector of Lakhimpur v. Bhuban Chandra Dutta, AIR (1971) SC A 2015; Prithvi Raj Taneja (dead) by Lrs. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr., AIR (1977) SC 1560 Smt. Kausa/ya Devi Bogra and Ors. etc. v. Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad and Anr., AIR (1984) SC 892, referred to. 1.2. While considering the market value disinclination of the vendor to part with his land and the urgent necessity of the purchaser to buy it B must alike be disregarded. Neither must be considered as acting under any compulsion. The value of the land is not to be estimated as its value to the purchaser. But similarly this does not mean that the fact that some particular purchaser might desire the land more than others is to be disregarded. The wish of a particular purchaser, though not his C compulsion may always be taken into consideration for what it is worth. Section 23 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 enumerates the matters to be considered in determining compensation. The first criteria to be taken into consideration is the market value of the land on the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4(1). Similarly, Section 24 of the Act enumerates the matters which the Court shall not take into consideration D in determining the compensation. A safeguard is provided in Section 25 ofthe Act that the amount of compensation to be awarded b~ the Court shall not be less than the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11. Value of the potentiality is to be determined on such materials as are available and without indulgence in any fits of imagination. E Impracticability of determining the potential value is writ large in almost all cases. There is bound to be some amount of guess work involved while determining the potentiality. [428-F-H; 429-A, BJ Vyricherla Narayana Gajapatiraju v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizagapatam, AIR (1939) P.C. 98, relied on. F Suresh Kumar v. Town Improvement Trust, Bhopal, (1989) 1 SVLR (C) 399, referred to. 1.3. The element of speculation is reduced to minimum if the underlying principles of fixation of market value with reference to G comparable sales are made when sale is within a reasonable time of the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, it should be a bona fide transaction; it should be of the land acquired or of the land adjacent to the land acquired; and it shoul
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.