UNION OF INDIA versus RAMCHANDRA & ORS.

Citation: [2022] 17 S.C.R. 263 · Decided: 11-08-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HEMANT GUPTA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
263
   [2022] 17 S.C.R. 263
263
UNION OF INDIA
v.
RAMCHANDRA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 5006- 5010 of 2022)
AUGUST 11, 2022
[HEMANT GUPTA AND VIKRAM NATH, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894– ss.23(1-A), 23(2) – Land owned
by company was acquired for Railway line–Land Acquisition
Collector awarded compensation @ Rs.5/- per square feet as the
market value of the land acquired, alongwith additional
compensation for expenditure incurred on construction of pillars
apart from statutory benefits–Reference Court considering the rates
of residential plots awarded compensation of Rs.40/- per square
feet for the land acquired and also for the entire land of the company
on the ground that the unacquired land cannot be utilized for the
purpose intended to be used by the Company –High Court affirmed
the said finding but, reduced the amount of compensation to Rs.19
per square feet – On appeal, held: Compensation for the entire
land owned by the Company is wholly unwarranted, illegal and
unduly advantageous to the Company–Process of determining
compensation by the Reference Court is wholly fallacious – Thus,
the appeal of the Company claiming enhancement of the
compensation @ Rs. 40/- per square feet is untenable – Even the
compensation determined by the High Court is questionable but no
reason found to interfere in the present appeal –Land owners
including the Company entitled to compensation of their land situated
within 30 meters from the middle of the railway track on both sides
@ Rs.19 per square feet–Company also entitled to compensation of
Rs. 14,34,300/- on account of pillars raised –In respect of remaining
land after the extent of 30 meters on the eastern side of the railway
track, the Company is entitled to compensation @ Rs. 9.5 per square
feet but without any benefits u/s.23(1-A) and s.23(2).
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The brochure issued by the Development
Authority of fully developed plots cannot form basis for award of
compensation for acquisition of undeveloped lands. The entire
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
264
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 17 S.C.R.
process of determination of the market value by the Reference
Court is contrary to the established principles of determination
of the market value of the acquired land as the sale of developed
land for the purpose of residential plots cannot be made basis for
acquisition of undeveloped agricultural land. Still further, the
acquired land can be said to be 41,771.32 square feet but the
compensation has been awarded for the entire land of the
Company as against the small area which was acquired for the
railway line, though the balance land is owned and is in possession
of the Company. The market value of Rs.25/- per square feet by
the High Court has been arrived at on the basis of statements of
some of the witnesses. No sale instance of the acquired land has
been produced, not even the sale deed by which the Company
has purchased the land almost 3 years prior to the acquisition.
Such sale instance would have been the best yardstick to arrive
at the market value of the acquired land. The High Court awarded
Rs.19/- per square feet as the compensation of the entire land
acquired. Though we are unable to agree with the reasoning, but
in the absence of any other alternative to determine market
value, we do not wish to interfere with the market value assessed
by the High Court. One cannot understand that how such large
chunk of land can be said to be unsuitable for any industry or any
evidence suggesting that industry could not be set up in such
large piece of land abutting road. The Company has not produced
any drawings to say that their factory cannot be put up in the
remaining compact land measuring more than 130000 square
feet. Therefore, compensation for the entire land owned by the
Company is wholly unwarranted, illegal and unduly advantageous
to the Company.[Paras 16-19][272-D; 273-C-G]
Lal Chand v. Union of India & Anr (2009) 15 SCC 769
– relied on.
1.2 Even in respect of land on the eastern side of the railway
line, it is not that such land cannot be utilized for any purpose.
There is land of the other land owners on the other side, therefore,
the same can be used for different purposes, may not be for
industry. Therefore, the compensation of Rs.19/- per square feet
awarded for such land is not sustainable on any principle of law.
The compensation of land on the western side of the railway track
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
265
is to be awarded only as the agricultur

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