LexSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC. versus RAMAN RAI AND ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC. y. RAMAN RAI AND ORS. ETC. AUGUST 14, 1995 [K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.) Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4(1), 9,-10,-22(2), 23(1-A), 23(2}-Acquisition of lands-Com- pensation-Enhancement sought 011 basis of claim mad~Held, Cowt is to detemiine compensation on basis of market value of acquired land as on date of publication of Section 4(1) notification and not on basis of claim as such-A claim is assessment of value of land made by m111e1~Jf compensa- A B c tion is to be detennined on maria basis, all land to be computed at 23 square yards per marlcr-Cowt fees on additional amount of compensation-To be D paid within time prescribed. The State Government acquired lands admeasuring 58 acres and ~dd of the land owner claimants in August 1979. The Land Acquisition Officer determined compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000 per acre for E block A and Rs. 36,000 per acre for block B. On reference, the Civil Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 1,00,000 and Rs. 60,000 for Blocks A and B respectively. On appeal, the High Court further enhanced the compensation to Rs. 1,60,000 per acre. The landowners filed appeals by special leave claiming further increase in the compen- sation whereas the State approached this Court in similar manner F against the enhanced compensation. The land owners contended that as the previous batch of appeals, the land-owners had claimed Rs .. 1,50,000 per acre and this Court had confirmed the same, they were entitled to higher compensation in the G instant appeals also as the amount claimed by them was higher than Rs. 150,000 per acre. Dismissing the appeals of the land owners, and partly allowing those of the State, that Court H 699 700 SUPREMECOURTREPORTS [1995] SUPP.2S.C.R. A HELD : 1.1. The Court is enjoined under s.23(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 to determine the compensation on the basis of the market value of the acquired land as on the date of the publication of section 4(1) notification and not on the basis of the claim as such. The claim is the assessment of the value of the land made by the owner. B (702-C; 701-H; 702-AJ 1.2. Under the unamended s.22(2) ·or the Act, the Court is prohibited to award compensation higher than that claimed pursuant to the notice under ss.9 and 10 of the Act. The statutory prohibition, not to award higher that what was claimed, itself shows that the Court is C not to award any amount in excess of the amount claimed. (702-B] 2. In view of the fact that on earlier occasion, this Court has confirmed the market value @ Rs. 1,50,000 as limited by the owners, in the instant appeals also the land owners would be entitled to the same D amounr of compensation, namely @ Rs. 1,50,000 per acre. (702-C] E F 3. There being variations in measurement of maria, as one maria is treated equivalent to 30 square yards at some places and 23 square yards at others, if the Land Acquisition Officer is to determine compensation on maria basis, he should consider all cases at 23 square yards per maria, irrespective of the villages in which the lands situate. If the lands are calculated on acreage basis there would not be any difficulty or discrepancy in awarding the compensation. (702-E] 4. If additional amount of compensation becomes due on account of calculation of land on maria basis, as a special case, deficit court fee, if required to be paid, may be paid within one month. (702-H, 703-A] 5. The claimants are not entitled to 12 per cent per annum of the additional amount under s.23(1-A). However, they are entitled to 9 pe~ cent interest for one year from the date of taking possession and 15 per cent G interest thereafter, till the date of deposit of the enhanced compensation awarded by operation of the }>rovisions to s.28 of the Act. The claimants are also entitled to 30 per cent solatium under s.23(2) of the Act on the en- h~nced compensation. (702-G] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7771-72 H of 1995 Etc. .. STATE v. RAMAN RAI 701 From the Judgment and Order dated 4.8.88 of the Punjab & Haryana A High Court in RF.A. Nos. 104-111of1985. V.C. Mahajan, Ms. S. Janani, G. Bansal, Manoj Swarup, P.N. Puri and C.N. Sreekumar for the appearing parties. The following Order of the Court was delivered : B These appeals are disposed of by a common judgment. The State has filed these appeals against the enhanced compensation. The respondents filed
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.