LexSPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER . versus MAHARANI BISWAL AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011] 10 S.C.R. 609 SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER . v. MAHARANI BISWAL AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 2672 of 2004) AUGUST 24, 2011 [DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] Land Acquisition Act,. 1894: A B c Compensation - Determination of - Land measuring Ac. 4. 98 situated in village Lodhani in the District of Dhenkanal notified for acquisition - Land acquisition officer fixed compensation at Rs. 3100 - Reference court enhanced compensation to Rs. 10,000 per acre - High Court further 0 enhanced compensation amount to Rs. 75,000 per acre - On appeal, held: Reference Court discussed entire evidence including the deposition of witnesses and on appreciation thereof came to a definite finding that the acquired land on the date of issuance of the notification uls. 4 could not be E valued and assessed at more than Rs. 10,0001- per acre - · Said amount was just and fair compensation for the land acquired - High Court failed to indicate as to how the said findings were unreasonable and unjustified and proceeded on wrong notion that the sale deeds of tiny pieces of land could be determining factor as the land acquired in the instant case F was Ac. 4. 98 decimals as against the sale deeds relied upon by which not even 1 decimal of land was sold - Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, judgment passed by the High Court set aside - Matter remitted to High Coult for consideration afresh. G Land measuring AC.4.98 situated in village Lodhani in the district of Dhenkanal was notified for acquisition on 18.2.1987. The land acquisition officer on 2.3.1988 609 H 610 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011) 10 S.C.R. A granted compensation for the acquired land @ Rs. 3100 (Taila land) and Rs .. 5490 (Sarad land) per acre. Dissatisfied with the compensation amount, the land owners filed reference applications. The reference court determined the compensation @ Rs. 10,000 per acre. The B claimants and the land acquisition officer both filed appeals before the High Court. The High Court enhanced the compensation amount to Rs.75,000 per acre. The instant appeal was filed by the land acquisition officer c challenging the order of the High Court. Disposing of the appeal and remitting the matter to the High Court, the Court HELD: 1. The entire burden was placed on respondents to prove and establish that they were D entitled to more than Rs. 3,100/- per acre which was determined by the Land Acquisition Officer. In order to prove the said fact, the respondents examined four witnesses and relied upon five sale deeds which were exhibited as Ext. 3 dated 14.9:1988, Ext. 4 dated 15.4.1985, E Ext. 5 dated 25.5.1984, Ext. 6 dated 15.7.1985, whereas the respondents also relied on Ext. 7 to show the location of G.P. Office and Grain Gola Office. The respondents also filed on record a map as Ext. 8 which disclosed that a road runs in between the acquired land. However, there F was no evidence to show that the said road, which ran in between the acquired land was a national highway. No such documentary evidence was placed on record to prove the said fact. The notification under Section 4 was issued on 18.2.1987 and, therefore, market value as G existing near about the said date and near about the same land was to be determfoed and assessed. The Reference Court very elaborately and minutely discussed the entire evidence on record including the deposition of the witnesses and on appreciation thereof came to a .definite finding and conclusion that the acquired land on the date H 1 SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER v. MAHARANI 611 BISWAL AND ORS. of issuance of the notification under Section 4 cannot be A valued and assessed at more than Rs. 10,000/- per acre. Consequently, the said amount was determined by the Reference Court as just and fair compensation for the land acquired. As against the said findings giving cogent reasons, the High Court failed to indicate as to how the B said findings were unreasonable and unjustified fixing the compensation of the land at Rs. 10,000/- per acre. It was necessary for the High Court to give reasons for its disagreement with the findings of the Reference Court but nothing of that nature was done by the High Court c and the High Court arrived at an abrupt decision raising the compensation to Rs. 75,000/- per acre. [Para 10, 11) [614-G-H; 615-A-G) 2. Since the High Court did not consider the oral evidence and ·also di
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.