SHARADAMMA versus SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ANR.

Citation: [2007] 2 S.C.R. 402 · Decided: 09-02-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: C.K. THAKKER · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

.;.<. 
A 
SHARADAMMA 
J( 
v. 
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ANR. 
FEBRUARY 9, 2007 
B 
[C.K. THAKKER AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANT A, JJ.] 
Land Acquisition Act, I 894-Land acquisition-Compensation-Claim 
of-Land situated on National Highway near railway line and suitable for 
··~ 
c industrial purpose-Claim of Rs. 201- per square yard-Courts below 
awarding compensation at the rate of Rs, 18,0001- per acre-Correctness 
of-Held: In view of the location of the land, compensation awarded at the 
rate of Rs. 201- per square yard less Rs. 30001- per acre towards conversion 
charges, proper. 
D 
Notification was issued For acquisition of land owned by the appellant 
for expansion of New Government Electric Factory. Appellant demanded 
compensation of Rs. 20.00 per square yard Land Acquisition Officer awarded 
compensation of Rs. 8,000 per acre. Appellant filed Reference. Reference 
,.t 
Court enhanced the compensation and awarded Rs. 20 per square yard less 
,_ 
E 
Rs. 3,000/- per acre since the land was having potentiality to conversion for 
non-agricultural use. Aggrieved. Authorities filed appeals. High Court noted 
that the Reference Court relied upon earlier award but the same was 
challenged and was before this Court. Therefore High Court remanded the 
matter to the Reference Court. Reference Court relied on the decision of 
Supreme Court in Special Land Acquisition Officer Bang/ore v. B.M. 
F Kirshnamurthy, and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 18,000/- Per acre. 
High Court upheld the award. Hence the present appeals. 
t 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: The claimant is right in submitting that both the Courts were 
G not correct in not awarding compensation as claimed by the appellant. It is 
also right in referring to B.M Krishnamurthy, particularly as to location of 
the land in question for claiming enhanced compensation vis-a-vis land in B.M 
Krishnamurthy' case. The map on record clearly shows that the land in 
-.... 
~ 
question is better located than the land in B.M Krishnamurthy's case. The 
then Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore from 1964 to 1967 admitted 
H 
402 
., 
SHARADAMMA v. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [THAKKER, J.) 
403 
.,.. 
that Kissan Factory was located at the distance of3/4th mile from the acquired A 
land and that the Corporation limits were about two furlongs from the acquired 
land. There was industrial potentiality of the lands though the acquired lands 
were not converted. He stated that lands were situated on National Highway 
of Bangalore-Madras, near Raihvay line and situated in Industrial Area. 
Thus, in view of the location of land, the claimant is entitled to compensation B 
at the rate of Rs. 20 per square yard as claimed by her. It is admitted that the 
land was not converted to non-agricuJtural use for which the owner was 
required to pay an amount of Rs. 3,000 per acre and to that extent the amount 
-~ 
deserves to be reduced. Thus, the claimant is entitled to compensation at the 
rate of Rs. 20 per square yard less Rs. 3,000 per acre. [Paras 12 and 13] 
[407-F-H; 407-A-D] c 
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore v. B.M Krishnamurthy, 
[1985] 1 sec 469, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 6587-6588 of 
2000. 
-D 
_ .. 
From the Judgment and Final Order dated 12. l 0 .1998 of the High Court 
of Karnataka at Bangalore in M.F.A. No. l 387c/w and 1376/1994. 
-.J 
S.S. Javali and P.R. Ramasesh for the Appellant. 
Sanjay R. Hegde, Vikrant Yadav, Sashidhar, Shiv Kumar Suri, Naveen R. E 
Nath, Anita Shenoy and Lalit Mohini Bhat for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
C.K. THAKKER, J. l. The present appeals arise out of a common 
-~ 
judgment and order passed by the High Court of Kamataka at Bangalore on F 
October 12, 1998 in MFA Nos. 1387of1994 and 1376of1994. By the said 
order, the High Court confirmed the order passed by the Reference Court on 
May 31, 1993 in LAC Nos. 33 of 1980 and 76 of 1980. 
2. To appreciate the grievance of the appellant, it is necessary to state 
few facts. 
G 
.. "'1-. 
3. The appellant Smt. Sharadamma, widow ofB.M. Venkataswamappa is 
the owner of land bearing Survey Nos. 112 and 113 situate at village 
Byappanahalli. Survey No. 112 admesures 2 acres while Survey No. 113 
admeasures l acre and l gunta. The land was sought to be acquired for 
H 
expansion of New Government Electric Factory ('NGEF' for short), Bangalore. 
~ 
404 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 2 S.C.R. 
A

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