REDDY VEERANA versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

Citation: [2022] 3 S.C.R. 663 · Decided: 05-05-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VINEET SARAN, J.K. MAHESHWARI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
663
REDDY VEERANA
v.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 3636 of 2022)
MAY 05, 2022
[VINEET SARAN AND J. K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: ss. 4, 11, 17 – Compensation –
Grant of – Large piece of land allotted to DLF, including the
scheduled piece of land of the appellant for which, the decree of
permanent injunction was in operation – Scheduled piece of land
subsequently acquired – High Court determined compensation at
the rate of Rs. 1,10,000/- per square meter as per circle rate and
also ordered deduction of development charges to the extent of 50%
– On appeal, held: Determination of the compensation has to be
made by taking into consideration the circle rate which was
determined as per the market value – High Court rightly determined
compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,10,000/- per square meter as per
circle rate – As regards deduction of development charges to the
extent of 50% made by High Court, the High Court did not take
into consideration all the factors encircling the issue and routinely
proceeded with the maximum deduction of 50% development charge
– Scheduled piece of land is a costly land, being situated at the
centre of development of authority, has commercial use, and even a
mall has been constructed on it – Without acquisition, the piece of
land belonging to appellant was transferred to DLF and the
acquisition was made subsequently – Possession of scheduled piece
of land, though taken long back in year 2004-2005, but till date,
the appellant has not been paid the compensation and is litigating
before courts even up to subsequent rounds – In view thereof,
deduction of development charges to the extent of 50% by High
Court cannot be sustained – Also, the civil right of appellant is
violated in breach of Art. 300-A – In view thereof, respondents
directed to compute the amount of compensation by taking the circle
rate of Sector -18, i.e., Rs. 1,10,000/-per square meter – Judgment
of the High Court directing 50% deduction towards development
charge set aside, however, the amount of solatium of 30% is payable
– Statutory interest on the amount of compensation to be payable
[2022] 3 S.C.R. 663
663
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
664
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 3 S.C.R.
@ 9% from the date of taking over of possession, for a period of
one year, thereafter, @ 15% p.a. to be paid, and in addition thereto,
3% penal interest to be paid –  Constitution of India – Art. 300A.
Compensation – Determination of – Held: Compensation can
be determined by taking into consideration the circle rate which
has been determined as per the market value – Market value of a
property is the price that a willing purchaser would pay to a willing
seller for it, taking into account its current condition, all existing
advantages, and potential possibilities, while excluding any benefit
resulting from the implementation of the scheme for which the
property is compulsorily acquired – Thus, the market value is to be
determined in the light of price paid by the purchaser of similar
land in the neighbourhood of the land in question and in cases,
where no records for such transaction/purchase is available, the
minimum statutory value in accordance with Stamp Act must be taken
as market value for circle rate – In no event, the compensation can
be paid at a rate lesser than that of market value as determined for
the purpose of payment of stamp duty under Stamp Act.
Compensation – Determination of – Deduction of development
charges – Quantum of – Held: There is no straight jacket formula
to arrive at  the quantum  of deduction of development  charge – It
must be assessed based on the facts of the individual case after due
consideration of all the factors, the nature of land to be acquired,
the extent of area to be acquired, the extent of development in the
adjoining land as well as land proposed to be acquired, the
commercial potentiality and so on.
Interest: Nature of – Held: Is a consideration paid either for
the use of money or forbearance from demanding it after it has
fallen due – Interest, whether it is statutory or otherwise, represents
the profit, the creditor may have made if he had used the money or
from the loss, he may have suffered because he could not use the
amount.
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The determination of the compensation has to
be made by taking into consideration the circle rate which has
been determined as per the market value. The market value of a
property is the price th

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