THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KARNATAKA
A
HOUSING BOARD AND ORS.
v.
P.M. MALLAPPA AND ORS.
MARCH 14, 1997
B
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 :
Land Acquisition-Dry land-Compensation-Detennination of- C
Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 8,000 per
acre-Reference court enhanced compensation to Rs. 15,000 and 011 recon-
sideration after direction of High Court, it enhanced the compensation to Rs.
38, 000 per acre which was not challenged by State-On writ petition by land
owner, High Court enhanced compensation to Rs. 12 per sq. yd. i.e. Rs. 58,000
per acr&-Held, potential value shall be detennined for the land existing as D
on the date of notification, not after subsequent developments have taken
place-Value of developed land bears 1w relevance in this regard-Order of
High .Coult set aside and that of reference court stands confinned.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 2228-34 E
of 1997.
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.12.95 of the Karnataka High
Court in M.F.A. Nos. 2688-90/88, 2069/89, 3062/87, 2691/88 and 91 of 1991.
G.L. Sanghi, S.K. Kulkarni and Ms. Sangeeta Kumari for the Appel-
F
!ants.
S.R. Bhat, Naveen R. Nath, Mrs. Kiran Bhardwaj and Ms. Hetu
Arora for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Notice on other respondents has been served. They are not appear-
ing either in person· or through counsel. Delay condoned. S.R. Bhatt
appears for one respondent in one appeal.
Leave granted.
1131
G
H
1132
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1997] 2S.C.R.
A
These appeals, by special leave, arise from the judgment of the
Division Bench. of the Karnataka High Court, dated December 22, 1995
made in M.F.A. Nos. 2688/88 and batch.
Notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for
short, the 'Act') acquiring a large extent of land was published on March
B 25, 1971 .. The Land Acquisition Officer in its award granted compensation
at the rate of Rs. 8,000 per acre for the dry larids with which we are now
concerned. We are riot co,ncerned with other lands because there is no
appeal in that behalf. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the Civil
Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 15,000 per acre. The High Court
C remitted the matter to the reference Court for reconsideration. Thereafter,
the reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 38,000. On appeal,
the High Court by the impugned judgment has enhanced the compensation
to Rs. 12 per sq. yd. which amounts to Rs. 58,000 per acre. It is seen that
since the respondents have not filed any appeal under Section 26 of the
Act against the award granting enhanced compensation of Rs. 38,000 per
D acre, we do not propose to go into the enhancement granted by the
reference Court.
The only question is : whether the High Court would be justified in ·
enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12 per sq. yd., in other words, Rs.
E 58,000 per acre. Admittedly, the land is dry land and the Land Acquisition
Officer had pointed out in his award that the converted lands for which he
had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 9,000 and Rs.10,000 per acre,
bear different connotation to the actual dry land existing as on that date.
The potential value shall be determined for the land existing as on the date
of the notification and not after subsequent developments have taken place.·
F The value of the developed land bears no relevance to further enhance- '
ment of the value. Under these circumstances, the High Court has wholly
incorrect in enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12 per sq. yd., i.e., Rs.
58,000 per acre.
G
The appeals 'are accordingly allowed and the judgment and order of
the High Court stand set aside and that of the reference Court stands
confirmed. No costs.
R.P ..
Appeals allowed.
Lex