Land Acquisition Act Comparison

1
USEFUL ARTICLE
OF
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
&
The Right to fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013.
PREPARED BY
A P RANDHIR.
A P RANDHIR

2
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION
1. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
The Land Acquisition Act of 1894, allows the Indian Government to acquire the private land
in the country. Under this Act, “Land Acquisition” means acquiring land for any public
purpose by the government or its agency, as authorized by law, from the individual
landowners after paying a fixed compensation in lieu of losses incurred by these
landowners due to the surrendering of their land to the concerned government agencies.
According to this Act, the state has the power to exercise its right of eminent domain
wherein it is the ultimate owner of all the Land which it can acquire for public purposes
after paying full compensation calculated on the basis of market value. Despite numerous
amendments to the Act after independence, the two basic principles of land acquisition,
that is,
A). Public purposes and
B). Compensation on Market Value remains unchanged.
Although the Central Government determines the content of the law, there can be
regional variations in the procedural matters. As Land is a scarce resource and always has
various holders claiming ownership, this Act provided a set of rules for convenient
settlement of such disputes. As per the 1894 Act, land can be acquired either under Part-II
or Part-VII of the Act. While the former is used when acquiring body is the central or state
government or companies that are either owned, partly owned or controlled by the State,
the latter is used in case of private companies. Another important aspect is that, while land
acquisition under Part-II is entirely for “Public Purpose”, acquisition under Part-VII can be
for both “Public Purpose” and “Non-public Purpose”, although the scope for “Non-public
Purpose” is very limited.
1.1 Introduction and History of Land Acquisition Act 1894
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is the primary legislation in India that deals with the
acquisition of land by the Government for a public purpose. It forms the Parent Act and is
the basis of all Central and State laws relating to compulsory acquisition and the
compensation payable to the interested person upon such acquisition. Therefore it is
A P RANDHIR

3
important to note that the power of the Government in this regard is not absolute and is
subject to payment of adequate and just compensation to the landowner. Thus the law of
compensation is intertwined with the law of acquisition. What any statute relating to
acquisition or requisition seeks to achieve is acquisition and not confiscation. The cardinal
principles pertaining to acquisition are contained in two inbuilt conditions, viz., the right of
the expropriated owner to receive compensation and, no acquisition is permissible without
a public purpose.
1.2 History of Law of Land Acquisition in India
The first piece of legislation in respect of acquisition of property in India was the
Bengal Regulation I of 1824 which was applicable throughout the whole of the provinces
immediately subject to the presidency of Fort William. This regulation provided rules for
enabling the officers of Government to acquire, at a fair valuation, land or other
immovable property required for roads, canals or other public purposes.
In 1850, some of the provisions of the Regulation were extended to the town of
Calcutta with the object of confirming the title, to lands in Calcutta taken for public
purposes. In 1850, when the Railways were being developed, the Railways were declared
as public works and the Regulation was extended to the Railways also. As Regards
Bombay, the Building Act XXVIII of 1839 was the first piece of legislation which provided
for acquisition of land "for the purposes of widening or altering anyexisting public road,
street or other thoroughfare or drain or for making any new public road street or other
thoroughfare within, the stands of Bombay and Colaba.This Act was extended to Railways
in the year 1850. In Madras, Act XX of 1852 was passed, for the purpose of facilitating the
acquisition of land for public purpose in the Madras presidency. Railways were brought
under the purview of 'public purpose' in 1850. Thus, it could be seen that till 1857, there
was no law of land acquisition applicable to the whole of British India. The First Legislation
on the subject of land acquisition for the whole of British India was the Act VI of 1857,
which repealed all previous enactments relating to acquisition. As stated in its preamble,
its object was to make better provisions for the acquisition of land needed for public
purposes within the territories in the possessionand under the governance of the East
India Company and for determination of the amount of compensation to be paid for the
A P RANDHIR

4
same. Under this legislation, the collector was empowered to fix the amount of
compensation by agreement if possible; but if there was no such agreement, the dispute
had to be referred to arbitrators whose decision was to be final and could not be assailed,
except for their misconduct or corruption. Therefore it could be seen that the Collectors
have been given a prominent role right from 1857 and still they are playing a key role in
awarding compensation even today similarly, the so called Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) was introduced in acquisition proceedings way back in 1857. Then it was found that
the method of settlement of compensation by agreement or arbitration was unsatisfactory
as the arbitrators were incompetent and even corrupt. Further it was also realized that
there was no appellate mechanism against the awards given by the arbitrators. In other to
correct this anomaly, the legislature intervened and passed the Act X of 1870. The notable
contribution of this Act was that, for the first time, the Act provided for a reference to a Civil
Court for the determination of the amount of compensation when the collector could not
settle it by agreement. It laid down a clear procedure for the acquisition of land and also
provided definite rules for the determination of compensation. However the Act could not
plug many loopholes in the then existing system, and had to be eventually replaced by the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 originally applied to the British
India only and the Native States passed their own Acts, for example the Mysore Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, 1089 and the Hyderabad Land
Acquisition Act, 1309 Fasli etc. In fact under the Government of India Acts 1919 and 1935
the provinces had the power to legislate with respect to compulsory acquisition of land and
by exercising such power many provinces amended in respect of certain provisions, the
Act of 1894. After the Indian Independence Act, 1947, by virtue of the Indian Independence
(Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances) Order, 1948 the Act was made applicable to
all the provinces of India. After the Constitution, came into force it was made applicable to
the whole of India except Part B States.
1.3 . IMP PROVISION OF Old Land Aquistion ACT
Commencement of the acquisition proceedings and Award.
Following three notifications and their dates are very very important for any
acquisition proceeding and to calculate the base year for fixing market value of
acquired land, time limit to produce objections and to file reference and also for
A P RANDHIR

5
determining the amount of compensation and interest thereon.
1. Notification u/s 4(1). This can be considered as initiation of any Acquisition
proceedings.
(1) Whenever it appears to the appropriate Government that land in any locality is
needed or is likely to be needed for any public purpose or for a company, a
notification to that effect shall be published in the Official Gazette and in two daily
newspapers circulating in that locality of which at least one shall be in the regional
language, and the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such
notification to be given at convenient places in the said locality (the last of the dates
of such publication and the giving of such public notice, being hereinafter referred to
as the date of the publication of the notification).
(2) Thereupon it shall be lawful for any officer, either, generally or specially
authorised by such Government in this behalf, and for his servants and workmen,to
enter upon and survey and take levels of any land in such locality; to dig or bore in
the sub-soil; to do all other acts necessary to ascertain whether the land is adapted
for such purpose; to set out the boundaries of the land proposed to be taken and
the intended line of the work (if any) proposed to be made thereon; to mark such
levels, boundaries and line by placing marks and cutting trenches; and, where
otherwise the survey cannot be completed and the levels taken and the boundaries
and line marked, to cut down and clear away any part of any standing crops, fence
or jungle:
Provided that no person shall enter into any building or upon any enclosed Court or
garden attached to a dwelling-house (unless with the consent of the occupier there
of) without previously giving such occupier at least seven days’ notice in writing of
his intention to do so.
Sec. 5. Payment for damage.
The officer so authorised shall at the time of such entry pay or tender payment for
all necessary damage to be done as aforesaid, and in case of dispute as to the
sufficiency of the amount so paid or tendered, he shall at once refer the dispute to
A P RANDHIR

6
the decision of the Collector or other Chief Revenue Officer of the District, and such
decision shall be final.
2. Notification u/s 6. Declaration that land is required for a public purpose.—
(1) Subject to the provisions of Part VII of this Act, when the appropriate
Government is satisfied, after considering the report, if any, made under section 5-
A, sub-section (2) that any particular land is needed fora public purpose, or for a
company, a declaration shall be made to that effect under the signature of a
Secretary to such Government or of some officer duly authorised to certify its orders
and different declarations may be made from time to time in respect of different
parcels of any land covered by the same notification under section 4, sub-section
(1), irrespective of whether one report or different reports has or have been made
(wherever required) under section 5-A, sub- section (2):
Provided that no declaration in respect of any particular land covered by a
notification under section 4, sub-section (1),—
(i) published after the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment and
Validation) Ordinance, 1967 (1 of 1967), but before the commencement of the Land
Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, shall be made after the expiry of three years
from the date of the publication of the notification; or
(ii) published after the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act,
1984, shall be made after the expiry of one year from the date of the publication of
the notification:
Provided further that no such declaration shall be made unless the compensation
to be awarded for such property is to be paid by a company, or wholly or partly out
of public revenues or some fund controlled or managed by a local authority.
Explanation 1.—In computing any of the periods referred to in the first proviso, the
period during which any action or proceeding to be taken in pursuance of the
notification issued under section 4, sub-section (1), is stayed by an order of a Court
shall be excluded.
A P RANDHIR

7
Explanation 2.—Where the compensation to be awarded for such property is to be
paid out of the funds of a corporation owned or controlled by theState, such
compensation shall be deemed to be compensation paid out of public revenues.
(2) Every declaration shall be published in the Official Gazette, and in two daily
newspapers circulating in the locality in which the land is situate of which at least
one shall be in the regional language, and the Collector shall cause public notice of
the substance of such declaration to be given at convenient places in the said
locality (the last of the dates of such publication and the giving of such public notice,
being hereinafter referred to as the date of the publication of the declaration), and
such declaration shall state the district or other territorial division in which the land is
situate, the purpose for which it is needed, its approximate area, and, where a plan
shall have been made of the land, the place where such plan may be inspected.
(3) The said declaration shall be conclusive evidence that the land is needed for a
public purpose or for a company, as the case may be; and, after making such
declaration the appropriate Government may acquire the land in a manner
hereinafter appearing.
9. Notice to persons interested .—
(1) The Collector shall then cause public notice to be given at convenient places on
or near the land to be taken, stating that the Government intends to take possession
of the land, and that claims to compensation for all interests in such land may be
made to him.
(2) Such notice shall state the particulars of the land so needed, and shall require all
persons interested in the land to appear personally or by agent before the Collector
at a time and place therein mentioned (such time not being earlier than fifteen days
after the date of publication of the notice), and to state the nature of their respective
interests in the land and the amount and particulars of their claims to compensation
for such interests, and their objections (if any) to the measurements made under
section 8. The Collector may in any case require such statement to be made in
writing and signed by the party or his agent.
A P RANDHIR

8
(3) The Collector shall also serve notice to the same effect on the occupier (if any)
of such land and on all such persons known or believed to be interested therein, or
to be entitled to act for persons so interested, as reside or have agents authorised
to receive service on their behalf, within the revenue district in which the land is
situate.
(4) In case any person so interested resides elsewhere, and has no such agent, the
notice shall be sent to him by post in a letter addressed to him at his last known
residence, address or place of business and registered under sections 28 and 29 of
the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 (6 of 1898).
3. Notification u/s 11.
11. Enquiry and award by Collector .—
(1) On the day so fixed, or on any other day to which the enquiry has been
adjourned, the Collector shall proceed to enquire into the objection (if any) which
any person interested has stated pursuant to a notice given under section 9 to the
measurements made under section 8, and into the value of the land at the date of
the publication of the notification under section 4, sub- section (1), and into the
respective interest of the persons claiming the compensation and shall make an
award under his hand of—
(i) the true area of the land;
(ii) the compensation which in his opinion should be allowed for the land; and
(iii) the apportionment of the said compensation among all the persons known or
believed to be interested in the land, of whom, or of whose claims,he has
information, whether or not they have respectively appeared before him:Provided
that no award shall be made by the Collector under this sub-section without the
previous approval of the appropriate Government or of such officer as the
appropriate Government may authorise in this behalf: Provided further that it shall
be competent for the appropriate Government to direct that the Collector may make
such award without such approval in such class of cases as the appropriate
Government may specify in this behalf.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section(1), if at any stage of the
A P RANDHIR

9
proceedings, the Collector is satisfied that all the persons interested in the land who
appeared before him have agreed in writing on the matters to be included in the
award of the Collector in the form prescribed by rules made by the appropriate
Government, he may, without making further enquiry, make an award according to
the terms of such agreement.
(3) The determination of compensation for any land under sub-section (2) shall not
in any way affect the determination of compensation in respect of other lands in the
same locality or elsewhere in accordance with the other provisions of this Act.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908),
no agreement made under sub-section(2) shall be liable to registration under that
Act.
11-A. Period within which an award shall be made.—
(1)The Collector shall make an award under section 11 within a period of two years
from the date of the publication of the declaration and if no award is made within
that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse:
Provided that in a case where the said declaration has been published before the
commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, the award shall be
made within a period of two years from such commencement.
Explanation.—In computing the period of two years referred to in this section, the
period during which any action or proceeding to be taken in pursuance of the said
declaration is stayed by an order of a Court shall be excluded.
12. Award of Collector when to be final .—
(1) Such award shall be filed in the Collector’s office and shall, except as hereinafter
provided, be final and conclusive evidence, as between the Collector and the
persons interested, whether they have respectively appeared before the Collector or
not, of the true area and value of the land, and the apportionment of the
compensation among the persons interested.
(2) The Collector shall give immediate notice of his award to such of the persons
A P RANDHIR

10
interested as are not present personally or by their representatives when the award
is made.
16. Power to take possession .—
When the Collector has made an award under section 11, he may take possession
of the land, which shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government, free from all
encumbrances.
2. Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
And Resettlement (Amendment) Bill, 2015
The Amendment Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha by the Minister for Rural
Development, Mr. Birender Singh on February 24, 2015. The Bill amends the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act, 2013). The Bill replaces the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement
(Amendment) Ordinance, 2014.
3. KINDS OF MATHOD FOR DECIDING VALUE OF LAND
3.1 Belting Method:
When a plot of big size is to be valued or when a plot with less frontages and more
depth is to be valued, it is logical to adopt the method of belting. It is due to the principle
that the value of land in general decrease as the depth of the plot increases or in other
words, the front land abutting road is more valuable than the rear land away from
road.
The main problem facing the Valuer while adopting this method is to decide the
depth up to which the maximum land value extends and from that point onwards, it starts
declining or diminishing. The next step would then be to fix the relationship regarding the
value of back land to the front land. In this method, the plot of land under consideration is
divided into different sections or zones and different rates of land are estimated for each
section or zone.
A P RANDHIR

11
Usually, the plot of land is divided into three belts.
1. The depth of first belt near the road is suitably adjusted.
2. The depth of second belt is kept 50% more than that of first belt and,
3. the depth of third belt is kept 50% more than that of second belt.
Consider the size, shape, location and various other factors affecting rate of land, a
suitable rate of land is estimated and that is taken for the first belt. For second belt, two-
thirds of rate of first belt is taken and for third belt, one-half of rate of first belt is taken.
There is no hard and fast rule regarding the ratio of land values of front portion and back
portion. Each case has to be studied independently depending upon the merit of each
case, a valuer has to apply his own judgement.
Smt. Lila Ghosh (Dead) through Lr. Tapas Chandra Roy Vs State of West Bengal)
2003(2) Apex Court Judgments 626 (S.C.) Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4, 6, 23, 28
and 34 - Acquisition of compact block - Belting method is not the correct method for
determination of compensation.
3.2 Developmental Method:
This method is used for Lands which are not developed but bears potential
strength to appreciate to a considerable value if converted to residential/commercial
or an industrial layout depending upon the location, size, shape, frontage & depth
etc. If an NA Land is developed, the net plotable area is only 50%. Working back, one can
arrive at the present Value of NA Land of Residential area.
3.3 Comparative Method:
In this method, the various transactions of nearby lands are properly studied and
then a fair rate of land under consideration is decided. Thus, the comparative method will
be useful only in case of an active market where there are large number of statistics
available for comparison. The Valuer has to satisfy himself after a thorough inspection of
all the underlying factors in the market that there have been no changes in conditions
A P RANDHIR

12
since the transaction took place. The element of time plays a vital role in this method. In
case of volatile markets, it is found that within a very short interval of time, the evidence of
sale chosen for comparison becomes unreliable.
Following factors are to be taken into account while making analysis using
comparative method:
i) Location:
The value of land which is situated in a busy locality or centre of city or shopping district
will certainly be more than that of land which is situated far away from the town. The
location of the property is very important and it is quite likely that a slightly different
location can cause a vast difference to the market value. The location is said to be a prime
factor in demand for land.
ii) Size:
The size of plot also plays an important role in fixation of its value. The rate of a large land
cannot be compared to that of a small land. Usually, there will be keen demand for plots of
certain sizes in a particular locality. The rate of land with such sizes should be considered
as the trend prevailing in that locality for arriving at the value of open lands under
consideration.
iii) Shape:
People prefer to have land having regular shape. It is observed that plots of land with
regular shapes will be sold at a higher price than those with irregular shapes.
iv) Frontage and depth:
It is quite clear that the most valuable part of a plot of land is its street frontage and the
value of rear portion of plot decreases as the distance from street increases.
v) Return frontage:
A corner plot gets an additional return frontage and depending upon the importance of
intersecting streets or roads, there will be corresponding increase in the value of such
plots. The corner plot has better facility of entrance and egress & gives more light and
A P RANDHIR

13
ventilation. In residential area, a corner plot gives wide scope for better layout of shops or
offices with greater space for show-rooms and advertisements.
vi) Level:
If the natural level of land is lower than the road level, considerable amount will have to be
spent for filling and there will also be substantial increase in the cost of foundations. On
the contrary, if the natural level of land is considerably higher than the road level, there will
be difficulty in laying water / drainage lines and hence, the extra earth will have to be
excavated to make the plot reasonably level.
vii) Nature of soil:
For lands with building potentiality, the bearing capacity of soil should also be considered.
If the bearing capacity is adequate, the cost of foundation will be reasonable in proportion
to the total cost of the building. If, however, the bearing capacity is poor, considerable
amount will have be spent to make the structure stable. It is thus clear that the land with
good bearing capacity will command more rate as compared to the land with poor bearing
capacity.
viii) Land-locked land:
It sometimes so happens that a plot of land has no well-defined legal access and it is
surrounded on all sides by plots belonging to other owners resulting in less value.
ix) Restriction on development:
The permissible floor space index or F.S.I should be studied for the plot to be valued and
scrutinized. The plot of land having more permissible F.S.I. will naturally be sold at higher
price as compared to the one having less permissible F.S.I.
x) Encumbrances:
The plots of land which are subject to the easement rights of air, light or passage will be
less attractive to the prospective purchasers and depending upon the inconveniences
caused, there will be reduction in values of such lands.
A P RANDHIR

14
xi) Miscellaneous advantages:
In addition to the above consideration, if the property possesses some special advantages
because of its location or any other reason, the same should be considered while arriving
at the reasonable rate of open land.
4 COMPARISION OF OLD AND NEW ACT.
Comparative study of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act 2013
Provisions of other laws in consonance with the LARR 2013 The LARR Act, 2013
exempted 13 laws (such as the National Highways Act, 1956 and the Railways Act, 1989)
from its purview. However, the LARR Act, 2013 required that the compensation,
rehabilitation, and resettlement provisions of these laws be brought in consonance with the
LARR Act, 2013, within a year of its enactment (that is, by January 1, 2015), through a
notification. The Bill brings the compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement provisions of
these laws in consonance with the LARR Act, 2013.
4.1 Exemption of five categories of land use from certain provisions
The Bill creates five special categories of land use:
(i) defence,
(ii) rural infrastructure,
(iii) affordable housing,
(iv) industrial corridors, and
(v) infrastructure projects including Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects where the
central government owns the land.
The LARR Act, 2013 requires that the consent of 80% of land owners is obtained for
private projects and that the consent of 70% of land owners be obtained for PPP projects.
The Bill exempts the five categories mentioned above from this provision of the Act.
In addition, the Bill permits the government to exempt projects in these five
categories from the following provisions, through a notification: The LARR Act, 2013
A P RANDHIR

15
requires that a Social Impact Assessment be conducted to identify affected families and
calculate the social impact when land is acquired.
The LARR Act, 2013 imposes certain restrictions on the acquisition of irrigated
multi-cropped land and other agricultural land. For example, irrigated multi- cropped land
cannot be acquired beyond the limit specified by the appropriate government.
4.3 Return of Unutilised land
The LARR Act, 2013 required land acquired under it which remained unutilised for
five years, to be returned to the original owners or the land bank. The Bill states that the
period after which unutilised land will need to be returned will be: (i) five years, or (ii) any
period specified at the time of setting up the project, whichever is later.
4.4 Time period for retrospective application
The LARR Act, 2013 states that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 will continue to apply
in certain cases, where an award has been made under the 1894 Act. However, if such an
award was made five years or more before the enactment of the LARR Act, 2013, and the
physical possession of land has not been taken or compensation has not been paid, the
LARR Act, 2013 will apply.
The Bill states that in calculating this time period, any period during which the
proceedings of acquisition were held up: (i) due to a stay order of a court, or (ii) a period
specified in the award of a Tribunal for taking possession, or (iii) any period where
possession has been taken but the compensation is lying deposited in a court or any
account, will not be counted.
2.5 Other changes
The LARR Act, 2013 excluded the acquisition of land for private hospitals and
private educational institutions from its purview. The Bill removes this restriction. While the
LARR Act, 2013 was applicable for the acquisition of land for private companies, the Bill
changes this to acquisition for ‘private entities’. A private entity is an entity other than a
A P RANDHIR

16
government entity, and could include a proprietorship, partnership, company, corporation,
non-profit organization, or other entity under any other law.
The LARR Act, 2013 stated that if an offence is committed by the government, the
head of the department would be deemed guilty unless he could show that the offence
was committed without his knowledge, or that he had exercised due diligence to prevent
the commission of the offence. The Bill replaces this provision and states that if an offence
is committed by a government official, he cannot be prosecuted without the prior sanction
of the government.
4.6 . WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE LA ACT, 1894 AND LARR ACT,
2013?
The following table compares some key features between the LA Act, 1894
and the LARR Act, 2013.
ISSUE LA ACT, 1894 LARR ACT,2013
Public Purpose Includes several uses such
asinfrastructure, development and
housing projects. Also includes use
by companies under certain
conditions
No significant changes.
Consent from
affected
people
No requirement. For private projects and
PPP- projects: Consent of
80% or 70% of the affected
families.
Social ImpactAct
Assessment
No requirement. SIA has to be undertaken
in
every acquisition.
Compensation Based on market value. Market value doubled in
rural areas but not in urban
area.
A P RANDHIR

17
Market value Based on the current use of land.
Explicitly prohibits using the
intended use of land while
calculating market value.
Higher of: (a) value
specified for stamp duty, or
(b) average of the top
50% recorded sale prices
of similar land.
Solatium 30% 100%
Resale of land No provision. Prior permission of the
government required.
Sharing of profit No provision. If the acquired land is
unused and is transferred,
20% of the profits shall be
shared with the original
land owners.
R&R No provision. R&R necessary for all
affected families. Minimum
R&R entitlements to be
provided to each affected
family specified.
Fertile land No restriction Acquisition of multi crop
or
agricultural land able only
as
a last resort.
Unutilized Land No provision After 5 years the states
can return the land either
to the owner or to the
State Land
Bank
OBJECTION/ DEFENCE
Four Types Of Objections Permissible Under Section 18
The Supreme Court in the case of Ambya Kalya Mhatre (dead) through Lrst. vs State
of Maharashtra 2012 (1) Mh.L.J. 9 has held that Section 18 does not require a land
A P RANDHIR

18
owner objecting to the amount of compensation, to make a claim for any specific amount
as compensation, nor does it require him to state whether the increase in compensation is
sought only in regard to the land, or land and building, or land, building and trees. A land
owner can seek reference to civil court, with reference to any one or more of the four types
of objections permissible under Section 18 of the Act, with reference to the award. His
objection can either be in regard to the measurement of the acquired land or in regard to
the compensation offered by the Collector or in regard to persons to whom it is shown as
payable or the apportionment of compensation among several claimants. Once the land
owner states that he has objection to the amount of compensation, and seeks reference to
the civil court, the entire issue of compensation is open before the Reference Court. Once
the claimant satisfies the Reference Court that the compensation awarded by the Land
Acquisition Officer is inadequate, the Reference Court proceeds to determine the
compensation, with reference to the principles in Section 23 of the Act.
5 APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE IN CASE OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT
5.1 Presumption & burden of proof. (Sec.12) Award of Collector when to be final :-
(1) Such award shall be filed in the Collector's office and shall, except as hereinafter
provided, be final and conclusive evidence, as between the Collector and the persons
interested, whether they have respectively appeared before the Collector or not, of the true
area and value of the land, and the apportionment of the compensation among the
persons interested.
(2) The Collector shall give immediate notice of his award to such of the persons
interested as are not present personally or by their representatives when the award is
made.
☼ Sec. 18, 23, 51, Market Value :- Burden of Proof- Held-Burden of proving true value of
acquired property is on the state that has acquired it for a particular purpose- on facts,
it can legitimately be concluded that the burden of proving inadequacy of amount
which lay on the claimant was successfully discharged by him-
☼ Mahesh Dattatray Thirthkar V/s State of Maharashtra(2009)11 Scc141.
☼Sec-23-Market Value-Burden of proving –Held always lie on Claimants.
A P RANDHIR

19
☼Sangunthala V/s SP.Tahasildar(2%) 3 SCC 661
☼ Sec. 23- 18-11. Compensation-Burden of Proof- Burden of Proving inadequacy of
amount determinate under the award on the claimant – once burden is discharged
onus would shifted on the collector to abuse sufficient evidence to sustain the Award.
☼ Amount of compensation payable on the basis of agreement between claimant &
collector u/s 11(2)- Best evidence court cannot be ignored it.
☼ Sale Price of small portion of land should not be ordinarily be mad the basis for
market value of larger portion of land.
☼ Expert report only consider when Found/Proved to be correct, genuine and
reliable
5.2 Burden on Claimant
1. Land Acquisition officer & Sub-collector Gadwal Vs Sreelatha Bhopal Anr.
Held that the burden is on the claimant to prove by adducing cogent and acceptable
evidence for higher compensation.
2. Special Deputy Collector & Anr Vs Kurra Sambasiva Rao & ors (1997) 6 SCC 41.
Though some guess work is involved, feats of imagination should be eschewed and
mechanical assessment of the evidence should be avoided. It is the paramount duty of the
Courts of facts to subject the evidence to very close scrutiny, objectively assess the
evidence tendered by the parties on proper consideration thereof in correct perspective to
arrive at adequate and reasonable market value. It is held that even in the absence of oral
evidence adduced by the land acquisition officer or the beneficiaries, the judges are to
draw from their experience the normal human conduct of the parties and bona fide and
genuine sale transactions are guiding star in evaluating the evidence. Misplaced
sympathies or undue emphasis solely on the claimants' right to compensation would place
very heavy burden on the public exchequer to which other everyone contributes by direct
or indirect taxes.
It is held by the Supreme Court in the said judgment that the best evidence of the
value of property are the sale transaction in respect of the acquired land to which the
claimant himself is a party; the time at which the property comes to be sold; nature of the
A P RANDHIR

20
consideration and the manner in which the transaction came to be brought out. These
factors are relevant and in absence of such sale deed relating to the acquired land, the
sale transactions relating to the neighbouring lands in the vicinity of the acquired land can
be considered.
3. Shalini Vaman Godbole vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 22 June,
2009Citation;2009(111)BOMLR2759 ;2009 LAC515 bom
The best evidence of the value of property are the sale transactions in respect of the
acquired land or the neighbouring land; the time at which the property comes to be sold;
the purpose for which it is sold; nature of the consideration; and the manner in which the
transaction came to be brought out, are also relevant factors. In the absence of sale deed
relating to the acquired land, the sale transactions relating to the neighbouring lands have
to be taken into consideration. Undoubtedly, such transactions must be within a
reasonable time of the date of the notification and preferably before such date, the
transactions must be bona fide and it should be a sale of the land similar to the land
acquired or land adjacent to the land acquired.
4. Gulzara Singh V State of Punjab (1993) 4 SCC, 245,
Held that mutation entries of the land transactions in the revenue records are not evidence
unless the parties to the transactions have been examined in proof of documents.
5.4 Additional Evidence Under Order Xli Rule 27 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure,
1908
1. Union of India vs Ibrahim Uddin and anr (2012) 8 SCC 148.
The Supreme Court in the said judgment has held that where the additional
evidence sought to be adduced removes the cloud of doubt over the case and the
evidence has a direct and important bearing on the main issue in the suit and interest of
justice clearly renders it imperative that it may be allowed to be permitted on record such
application may be allowed. It is further held that an application under Order XLI Rule 27
CPC is to be considered at the time of hearing of appeal on merits so as to find whether
the documents and/or the evidence sought to be adduced have any relevance/bearing on
A P RANDHIR

21
the issues involved. The admissibility of additional evidence does not depend upon the
relevancy to the issue on hand, or on the fact, whether the applicant had an opportunity for
adducing such evidence at an earlier stage or not, but it depends upon whether or not the
Appellate Court requires the evidence sought to be adduced to enable it to pronounce
judgment or for any other substantial cause. It is held that the true test, therefore is,
whether the Appellate Court is able to pronounce judgment on the materials before it
without taking into consideration the additional evidence sought to be adduced.
2. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (As amended) Ss.23(1A), 23(2) and 28, Civil Procedure
Code, 1908, O.47.R.1 - Reference Court - Review - Reference Court can review its earlier
order if there exists an error apparent on the face of record in terms of O.47.R.1 CPC.
(Jaya Chandra Mohapatra Vs Land Acquisition Officer, Rayagada) 2005(1) Apex Court
Judgments 496 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 508 (S.C.)
5.5 Burden of proof to prove regarding the market value for the acquired land.
1. Gafar v. Moradabad Development Authority reported in AIR 2007 SCW 5372
As held by this Court in various decisions, the burden is on the claimants to
establish that the amounts awarded to them by the Land Acquisition Officer are inadequate
and that they are entitled to more. That burden had to be discharged by the claimants and
only if the initial burden in that behalf was discharged, the burden shifted to the State to
justify the award.
2. Mahesh Dattatray Thirthkar v. State of Maharashtra" reported in AIR 2009
SUPREME COURT 2238
The burden of proving the true market value of acquired property is on the State
that has acquired it for a particular purpose. Where the landowner has been able to show,
by the testimony and valuation report of the expert valuer, that the award of compensation
passed by the Land Acquisition Officer was inadequate, the onus now shifts on the State
to adduce sufficient evidence to sustain the award. The burden of proof in civil cases is
that of "balance of probability" and not that of "beyond reasonable doubt". Thus minor
A P RANDHIR

22
inconsistencies in evidence are not relevant in civil cases in considering the question of
discharge of this burden.
5.6. Certified Copy Of Sale Deed- Evidentiary Value.
Sec. 51A, 23 of L.A.Act – Market value of acquired land fixation of – certified cope of –
sale deed relating upon without examining vendee or vender or vendor or anybody else
connected with the sale. L.A. Officer etc. V/s V. Narsilah, AIR 2001 SC 117 SC DB
Sectio No.51-A Scope of and evenditiary Value of the registered document – Held – not
only it permits the production of a certified copy of the registered sale deed in evidence But
per pits the acceptance of sick transaction without examination of the Vender or Vendee,
Hence , the Court can rely on such a presumption only if the same is not rebutted by other
evidence .
5.7 Compensation to be awarded within amount claimed
Sec.- 18, 25, of L.A.Act. 10 O-6-R-17 of CP Code- Compensation to be awarded
within amount claimed- amendment to enhance claim Rs. 20/- to Rs..100/- allowed by
reference Court in year 1983 – legality or propriety to unamended S.25 –Plea challenging
award of compensation in excess of amount claimed on basis of un amended S.25 – not
tenable. Benefit of enhanced rate of – Award of Collector passed on 26-6-69 & award of
reference Court passed on 31-5-1984- Both said dates fall within two termini indicated in
Sec. 30(2) of Amended Act – Benefit of Solatium & interest at enhanced rates is available
– Presumption & burden of proof. (Sec.12)
1 Mahesh Dattatray Thirthkar V/s State of Maharashtra (2009)11 SCC 141.
Sec. 18, 23, 51, Market Value :- Burden of Proof- Held-Burden of proving true value of
acquired property is on the state that has acquired it for a particular purpose- on facts, it
can legitimately be concluded that the burden of proving inadequacy of amount which lay
on the claimant was successfully discharged by him
A P RANDHIR

23
2. SangunMala v/s Sp. Tahshildar (2010) 3 SCC p-661
Sec. 18, 23, 51, Market Value :- Burden of Proof- Section No.23 – Market Value-
Determination- Consideration Burden of proving Market Value- always lie on Claimant-
Besides, relative advantages and facilities available on acquired land also need to be
consideration- Grant of higher compensation than claim.
6 : ROLE OF COURTS DECIDING LAND REFERENCE
6.1 Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs Special Land Acquisition on 21 July, 1988 1988 AIR
1652, 1988 SCR Supl. (1) 531
The following factors must be etched on the mental screen:
(1) A reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is not an appeal against the
award and the Court cannot take into account the material relied upon by the Land
Acquisition officer in his Award unless the same material is produced and proved before
the Court.
(2) So also the Award of the Land Acquisition officer is not to be treated as a judgment of
the trial Court open or exposed to challenge before the Court hearing the Reference. It is
merely an offer made by the Land Acquisition officer and the material utilised by him for
making his valuation cannot be utilised by the Court unless produced and proved before it.
It is not the function of the Court to suit in appeal against the Award, approve or
disapprove its reasoning, or correct its error or affirm, modify or reverse the conclusion
reached by the Land Acquisition officer, as if it were an appellate court.
(3) The Court has to treat the reference as an original proceeding before it and determine
the market value afresh on the basis of the material produced before it.
(4) The claimant is in the position of a plaintiff who has to show that the price offered for
his land in the award is inadequate on the basis of the materials produced in the Court. Of
A P RANDHIR

24
course the materials placed and proved by the other side can also be taken into account
for this purpose.
(5) The market value of land under acquisition has to be determined as on the crucial date
of publication of the notification under sec. 4 of the Land Acuisition Act (dates of
Notifications under secs. 6 and 9 are irrelevant).
(6) The determination has to be made standing on the date line of valuation (date of
publication of notification under sec. 4) as if the valuer is a hypothetical purchaser willing to
purchase land from the open market and is prepared to pay a reasonable price as on that
day. It has also to be assumed that the vendor is willing to sell the land at a reasonable
price.
(7) In doing so by the instances method, the Court has to correlate the market value
reflected in the most comparable instance which provides the index of market value.
only genuine instances have to be taken into account. (Some times instances are rigged
up in anticipation of Acquisition of land).
(9) Even post notification instances can be taken into account
(1) if they are very proximate,
(2) genuine and
(3) the acquisition itself has not motivated the purchaser to pay a higher price on
account of the resultant improvement in development prospects.
(l0) The most comparable instances out of the genuine instances have to be identified on
the following considerations:
(i) proximity from time angle,
(ii) proximity from situation angle.
(11) Having identified the instances which provide the index of market value the price
reflected therein may be taken as the norm and the market value of the land under
acquisition may be deduced by making suitable adjustments for the plus and minus factors
vis-a-vis land under acquisition by placing the two in juxtaposition.
A P RANDHIR

25
(12) A balance-sheet of plus and minus factors may be drawn for this purpose and the
relevant factors may be evaluated in terms of price variation as a prudent purchaser would
do.
The market value of the land under acquisition has there after to be deduced by loading
the price reflected in the instance taken as norm for plus factors and unloading it for minus
factors.
(14) The exercise indicated in clauses (11) to (13) has to be undertaken in a common
sense manner as a prudent man of the world of business would do.
6.2 DETERMINING THE MARKET VALUE
1. Sabhia Mohammed Yusuf Abdul Hamid Mulla (D) by L.Rs. and Ors.
Held : Laid down the guidelines to be considered while fixing the market value of the
acquired land by the Land Acquisition Officer such as
(i) existing geographical situation of the land,
(ii) existing use of the land,
(iii) already available advantages, like proximity to National or State High Way or road
and/or developed area and
(iv) market value of other land situated in the same locality/village/area or adjacent or very
near the acquired land.
Market value is ordinarily the price the property may fetch in the open market if sold
by a willing seller unaffected by the special needs of a particular purchase. It is held that
the amount of compensation cannot be ascertained with mathematical accuracy. A
comparable instance has to be identified having regard to the proximity from time angle as
well as proximity from situation angle.
It is held that for determining the market value of the land under acquisition, suitable
adjustment has to be made having regard to various positive and negative factors vis-a-vis
the land under acquisition by placing the two in juxtaposition. Supreme Court also spell
out the positive factors and negative factors while calculating the amount of compensation.
It is held that a smaller plot may be within the reach of many, a large block of land will have
to be developed preparing a layout plan, carving out roads, leaving open spaces, plotting
out smaller plots, waiting for purchasers and the hazards of an entrepreneur. Such
development charges may range between 20% and 50% of the total price. It is further held
A P RANDHIR

26
that for ascertaining the market value of the land, the potentiality of the acquired land
should also be taken into consideration. Potentiality means capacity or possibility for
changing or developing into state of actuality. It is held that market value of a property has
to be determined having due regard to its existing condition with all its existing advantages
and its potential possibility when led out in its most advantageous manner. The existing
amenities like water, electricity, possibility of their further extension, whether near about
town is developing or has prospect of development have to be taken into consideration.
2. Viluben Jhalejar Contractor (D) ... vs State Of Gujarat on 13 April, 2005
Section 23 of the Act specifies the matters required to be considered in determining
the compensation; the principal among which is the determination of the market value of
the land on the date of the publication of the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 4
One of the principles for determination of the amount of compensation for
acquisition of land would be the willingness of an informed buyer to offer the price therefor.
It is beyond any cavil that the price of the land which a willing and informed buyer would
offer would be different in the cases where the owner is in possession and enjoyment of
the property and in the cases where he is not.
Market value is ordinarily the price the property may fetch in the open market if sold
by a willing seller unaffected by the special needs of a particular purchase. Where definite
material is not forthcoming either in the shape of sales of similar lands in the
neighbourhood at or about the date of notification under Sectioin 4 (1) or otherwise, other
sale instances as well as other evidences have to be considered.
The amount of compensation cannot be ascertained with mathematical accuracy. A
comparable instance has to be identified having regard to the proximity from time angle as
well as proximity from situation angle. For determining the market value of the land under
acquisition, suitable adjustment has to be made having regard to various positive and
negative factors vis-`-vis the land under acquisition by placing the two in juxtaposition. The
positive and negative factors are as under: Positive factors /Negative Factors
Positive factors.-
(i) Smallness of size,
(ii) Proximity to a road,
A P RANDHIR

27
(iii) Frontage on a road,
1. Nearness to developed area,
2. Regular shape,
(vi) Level vis-a-vis land under acquisition,
(vii) Special value for an owner of an adjoining property to whom it may have some very
special advantage.
Negative factors.-
(i) Largeness of area,
(ii) Situation in the interior at a distance from the road,
(iii) Narrow strip of land with very small frontage compared to depth,
(vi) Lower level requiring the depressed portion to be filled up,
(v) Remoteness from developed locality,
(vi) Some special disadvantageous factors which would deter a purchase
Whereas a smaller plot may be within the reach of many, a large block of land will
have to be developed preparing a layout plan, carving out roads, leaving open spaces,
plotting out smaller plots, waiting for purchasers and the hazards of an entrepreneur. Such
development charges may range between 20% and 50% of the total price.
8. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON PRINCIPLES FOR DETERMINATION OF
AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION:
1. The General Manager oil & Natural Gas Corporation ltd V Ramesh Jivnbhai Patel
2008 (11) Scale 637, Hon'ble Supreme Court gave an illustration of the increase in the
market value and the percentage of increase to be made and the method of calculation of
the increase thus :-
"15.The increase in market value is calculated with reference to the market value during
the immediate preceding year. When market value is sought to be ascertained with
reference to a transaction which took place some years before the acquisition, the method
A P RANDHIR

28
adopted is to calculate the year to year increase. As the percentage of increase is always
with reference to the previous year's market value, the appropriate method is to calculate
the increase cumulatively and not applying a flat rate. The difference between the two
methods is shown by the following illustration (with reference to a 10% increase over a
basic price of Rs.10/- per sq.m):
Year By flat rate By cumulative
increase method increase method
1987 10.00 10.00
(Base Year)
1988 10 + 1=11.00 10.00 + 1.00 = 11.00
1989 11 + 1=12.00 11.00 + 1.10 = 12.10
1990 12 + 1=13.00 12.10 + 1.21 = 13.31
1991 13 + 1=14.00 13.31 + 1.33 = 14.64
1992 14 + 1=15.00 14.64 + 1.46 = 16.10
"16.We may also point out that application of a flat rate will lead to anomalous results. This
may be demonstrated with further reference to the above illustration. In regard to the sale
transaction in 1987, where the price was Rs.10 per sq.m, if the annual increase to be
applied is a flat rate of 10%, the increase will be Rs.1 per annum during each of the five
years 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991 and 1992. If the price increase is to be determined with
reference to sale transaction of the year 1989 when the price was Rs.12 per sq.m, the flat
rate increase will be Rs.1.20 per annum, for the years 1990, 1991 and 1992. If the price
increase is determined with reference to a sale transaction of the year 1990 when the price
was Rs.13 per sq.m, then the flat rate increase will be Rs.1.30 per annum for the years
1991 and 1992. It will thus be seen that even if the percentage of increase is constant, the
application of a flat rate leads to different amounts being added depending upon the
market value in the base year. On the other hand, the cumulative rate method will lead to
consistency and more realistic results. Whether the base price is Rs.10/- or Rs.12/10 or
Rs.13/31, the increase will lead to the same result. The logical, practical and appropriate
method is therefore to apply the increase cumulatively and not at a flat rate."
A P RANDHIR

29
8.1 DEDUCTION TOWARDS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES:
While fixing the market value, development charges have to be deducted
depending upon the nature of the land. While giving such deduction, the Land Acquisition
Officer must record reasons about the disadvantage of the land acquired and the purpose
for which the land was sought to be acquired as well as extent of land necessary for
providing developments like provision of roads, electricity, water and sewerage and other
facilities. The extent of deduction cannot be put in a straitjacket formula and it varies from
case to case. The Honble Supreme court had time and again indicated the factors to be
considered by the Land Acquisition Officer for making deduction towards development
charges as well as percentage of deduction. Such deduction is also not automatic unless
there is a factual finding that deduction was absolutely necessary on the facts of the case
by taking into consideration the ground situation. In case the property has already been
developed, there would be no requirement of deduction towards development.
Naganath (dead) by Lrs. v. Asst. Commissioner & Land Acquisition Officer and Anr.,
2008(13) Scale 202, the Honourable Supreme Court observed that the trend of the
various Judgments of the Supreme Court indicates deduction on account of development
charges in the range of 1/6th to 33%.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Atma Singh V State of Haryana (2008) 2 SCC 568,
(cited supra) referred to an earlier decision relating to deduction towards development
charge, it was held thus :-
In fixing the market value of a large property on the basis of a sale transaction for
smaller property, generally a deduction is given taking into consideration the expenses
required for development of the larger tract to make smaller plots within that area in order
to compare with the small plots dealt with under the sale transaction. However, in applying
this principle of deduction it is necessary to consider all relevant facts. It is not the extent of
the area covered under the acquisition which is the only relevant factor. If smaller area
within the large tract is already developed and situated in an advantageous position
suitable for building purposes and have all amenities such as roads, drainage, electricity,
communications, etc. then the principle of deduction simply for the reason that it is part of
the large tract acquired, may not be justified.
A P RANDHIR

30
In the present cases the lands covered by the acquisition are located by the side of
the National Highway and the Southern Railway Staff Quarters with the Town Planning
Trust Road on the north. The neighbouring areas are already developed ones and houses
have been constructed, and the land has potential value for being used as building sites.
Having found that the land is to be valued only as building sites and having stated the
advantageous position in which the land in question lies though forming part of the larger
area, the High Court should not have applied the principles of deduction. It is not in every
case that such deduction is to be allowed. Therefore, the High Court erred in making a
deduction of one-third of the value of the comparable sale and thus reducing the fair
market value of land from Rs.10 per sq yd to Rs.6.50 per sq. yd.
Atma Singh V State of Haryana,(2008) 2 SCC 568, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also
placed reliance on the Judgment in Kasthuri vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (1) SCC 354
and indicated the percentage of deduction towards development charges thus :-
wherein it was observed that in cases of those lands where there are certain advantages
by virtue of the developed area around, it may help in reducing the percentage of cut to be
applied, as the development charges required may be less on that account. There may be
various factual factors which may have to be taken into consideration while applying the
cut in payment of compensation towards development charges, may be in some cases it is
more than 1/3rd and in some cases less than 1/3rd. Therefore, in this case taking into
consideration the potentiality of the acquired land for construction of residential and
commercial buildings, the deduction made was only 20%.
Naganath (dead) by Lrs. v. Asst. Commissioner & Land AcquisiStion Officer and
Anr., 2008(13) Scale 202, cited supra, the Hon'ble Supreme Court indicated the
percentage of deduction towards development charges thus :
".We find merit in the Civil Appeal on the above three grounds. Firstly, we are of the view
that deduction of 53% towards development charges is on the higher side. No reason has
been given for applying the rate of 53% towards development charges. Generally, the
trend of the various judgments of this Court indicates deduction in the range of 1/6th to
33%. In this case, the High Court has deducted the charges at 53% which, in our view,
appears to be excessive."
A P RANDHIR

31
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER cum- L A O Shaik Azam Saheb [2009(1)SCALE 545]
The extent of deduction taking into consideration the nature of land acquisition and
the land involved in the subject matter of sale deed relied on for computing the market rate
and deducted one third towards development cost and observed thus:- "It must be bear in
mind that the lands in question were agricultural lands whereas the lands which were the
subject matter of the said deed of sale was a homestead land, thus, some amount,
therefore, will have to be deducted towards the development cost. Indisputably while
comparing the market value of developed lands with that of undeveloped lands, the court
has to make suitable deductions towards the cost of development.
8.3. Percentage Of Deduction For Development
Lal Chand Vs. Union of India 2009 (15) SCC 769
It was held that percentage of deduction for development to be made for arriving at
market value of large tracts of undeveloped agricultural land with potential for development
can vary between 20 and 75 per cent of the price of developed plots and observed that the
deduction for development consists of two components. The first is with reference to the
area required to be utilised for developmental works and the second is the cost of the
development works.
It is held by the Supreme Court that if the size of the plot is very small and the same
has to be taken into consideration for non-availability of other evidence and where the land
acquired is a large chunk of land, then it would be advisable to apply some deduction on
that score. Deduction can also be applied on account of wastage of land and development
charges. The Supreme Court considered the fact that the land under acquisition in that
matter was an agricultural land at the time of acquisition and the land was acquired to
carry out the development scheme.
The Supreme Court considered that the development purpose, being in public
interest, is bound to result in utilisation of part of the land for the purposes of roads, by-
links, water and electricity lines and other infrastructural amenities of the project. Supreme
Court held that as a general rule that for laying the roads and other amenities 33 1/3% is
required to be deducted. However, if the development has already taken place,
appropriate deduction needs to be made.
A P RANDHIR

32
It is held that DDA and other statutory authorities adopt different rates for plots in
the same area with reference to the economic capacity of the buyer, making it difficult to
ascertain the real market value, whereas market value determination for acquisitions is
uniform and does not depend upon the economic status of the land loser. Supreme Court
also considered that the land in question was a freehold land whereas the allotment "rates"
in the DDA Brochure refer to the initial premium payable on allotment of plots on leasehold
basis. The Development Authority will also incur considerable expenditure for development
of undeveloped land into a developed layout, which includes the cost of levelling the land,
cost of providing roads, underground drainage and sewage facilities, laying waterlines,
electricity lines and developing parks and civil amenities, which would be about 35% of the
value of the developed plot.
It is held by the Supreme Court that the two factors taken together would be the
'deduction for development' and can account for as much as 75% of the cost of the
developed plot. The 'deduction for development' with references to prices of plots in
authorised private residential layouts may range between 50% to 65% depending upon the
standards and quality of the layout.
V. Hanumantha Reddy Vs Land Acquisition Officer, 2003 12 SCC 642
It was held that neither its high potentiality nor its proximity to a developed land can
be a ground for not deducting the development charges and that normally 1/3rd deduction
could be allowed.
8. 4 For what period, the increase should be calculated?
The reference court has stated that the gap between 6.1.1987 (the date of transaction
covered by Ex.P15) and 15.9.1992 (the date of acquisition under consideration) was six
and half years. It therefore calculated the increase for six and half years. This is obviously
erroneous. The actual gap is five years and eight months and not six and half years.
However, for the purpose of calculation, we have to exclude the year of the relied-upon
transaction, which is the base year. If the year of relied-upon transaction in 1987, the
increase is applied not from 1987 itself but only from the next year which is 1988. If the
rate was Rs.10 per sq.m. in 1987, and the cumulative rate of increase is 7.5% per year,
the price will be Rs.10.75 in 1988, Rs.11.56 in 1989, Rs.12.42 in 1990, Rs.13.35 in 1991
A P RANDHIR

33
and Rs.14.35 in 1992. Thus the calculation of increase is only for five years and not for six
and half years.
8.5 What should be the market value of the acquired land?
By applying a cumulative rate of escalation of 7.5% over the market price of Rs.10 per
sq.m in 1987, we find that the market value in the year 1992 was Rs.14.35. The Reference
Court and High Court had deducted Rs.2/- towards distance factor. As the lands are
similarly situated and are in adjoining villages, it will be sufficient to deduct Rs.1.35 per
sq.m. instead of Rs.2/-. We accordingly determine the market value as Rs.13/- per sq. m.
8.6 Quantum Of Deduction
Quantum of deduction is concerned, it is held by the Supreme Court that in fixing
market value of the acquired land, which is undeveloped or under-developed, the Courts
have generally approved deduction of 1/3rd of the market value towards development cost
except when no development is required to be made for implementation of the public
purpose for which land is acquired.
Supreme Court Kasturi Vs State of Haryana, 2003 (1) SCC 354
It was held that in respect of agricultural land or undeveloped land which has
potential value for housing or commercial purposes, normally 1/3rd amount of
compensation has to be deducted out of the amount of compensation payable on the
acquired land subject to certain variations depending on its nature, location, extent of
expenditure involved for development and the area required for roads and other civic
amenities to develop the land so as to make the plots for residential or commercial
purposes.
Trishala Jain & Anr V State of Uttaranchal & Anr
It has considered the norms to be considered by the SLAO while computing
compensation for the land under acquisition including the issue of deductions to be made.
It is held by the Supreme Court that where the evidence led by the parties is of such
instances where the compensation paid is comparable, i.e. exemplar lands have all the
A P RANDHIR

34
features comparable to the proposed acquired land, including that of size, is another
category of cases where principle of 'no deduction' may be applied. Such cases are
exceptional and/or rare as normally the lands which are proposed to be acquired for
development purposes would be agricultural lands and/or semi or haphazardly developed
lands at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 (1)of the Act, which is the
relevant time to be taken into consideration for all purposes and intents for determining the
market value of the land in question.
Food Corporation of India through its District Manager, Faridkot, Punjab and Ors.
vs. Makhan Singh and Anr., (1992) 3 SCC 67
Held that proximity of time of sale with the date of notification under Section 4, closeness
between the lands sold and the land acquired, comparative size of the lands, potential
value of the acquired land having regard to the location and surroundings to be kept in
mind by the Land Acquisition Officer as well as by the reference Court while determining
the compensation. The Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the assessment
of compensation unless there is wrong application or misapplication of the relevant factors
or principles of compensation. A question thus arises for consideration of this Court is
whether the Reference Court while passing an order of enhancement of compensation has
applied any wrong application or misapplication of the relevant factors or principles of
compensation in favour of the claimant or while not allowing the entire claim of
compensation as prayed by the claimant while hearing these first three appeals.
Special Tehsildar Land acquisition Vishakapatanam Vs A Mangala Gowri (1991) 4
SCC 218
Held, that price received or paid in sale or purchase of the same land under acquisition
within the period proximate to the date of acquisition is a vital evidence. Exclusion of that
evidence and instead reliance on award of compensation made in respect of some other
land is erroneous. In the said judgment, Supreme Court also held that in a developed area,
deduction of 1/3 of the market value is proper.
State of Maharashtra Vs Bhausaheb Dadasaheb Misal(deceased) through L.Rs.
decided on 14th February, 1995 in First Appeal No.1013 of 1987
A P RANDHIR

35
It has held that sale instances ten years prior to notification relating to rates prevalent may
form basis for determination of compensation. Ten percent of increase for every year may
be allowed towards increase in the price. A lump sum is to be added further to agricultural
land having building potentiality.
Supreme Court P Rajan and Kerala State Electricity Board and anr (1997) 9 SCC 330
Hon'ble Court has held that determination of compensation on the basis of square feet
would be confined only to highly developed commercial land or land situated at a place in
the heart of a city.
8.7. Several Exemplars With Reference To Similar Lands
The Supreme Court in the case of Mehrawal Khewaji Trust Faridkot Vs State of
Punjun & ors AIR 2012 SC 2721,
It has held that when there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, it is the
general rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied that it is a bona fide
transaction has to be considered and accepted. It is not desirable to take an average of
various sale deeds placed before the authority/court for fixing fair compensation.
8.8 Determining The Rate Of The Acquired Land In Question.
Surender Singh Versus State Of Haryana & Ors. Civil Appeal No.890 Of 2018 January
25, 2018
Para 37. The High Court, in the absence of any evidence on any of these issues, could not
have determined one flat market rate of the acquired land in question by applying one
isolated rate of one land situated in one village Kasan and adding 8% annual increase
from 1994 in such rate and made it applicable to the entire lands situated in 15 different
villages.
Para 38. In our opinion, it is only when the evidence had been adduced by the parties to
the lis on the aforementioned issues, the Court would have been in a position to apply its
mind objectively as to which method should be applied for determination of the rate, i.e.,
A P RANDHIR

36
whether belting system or flat rate system or different rates for different lands depending
upon the quality of land situated in different villages etc.
Para 39. The fair market value of the acquired land cannot be decided in isolation on the
basis of only one factor. There are several other factors, which govern the determination of
the rate. These factors need to be proved with sufficient evidence. It must appear that the
Courts have made sincere endeavor to determine the fair market rate of the acquired land
and while determining has taken into account all relevant aspects of the case. It is the duty
of the landowners and the State to adduce proper and sufficient evidence to enable the
Courts to arrive at a reasonable and fair market rate of the acquired land prevalent on the
date of acquisition.
8.9 VALUATION ON THE BASIS OF RENT
The rent of a number of years purchase multiplier is capitalized in this method. It
can be resorted to only when no other method is available. If the rent is very low or very
high this method is unsafe.
The method:
1. Find out the fair rent
2. Deduct repair charges, insurance, bad debts, expenses for collecting rent etc.
3. Determine the return and find out the multiplier (rate per cent).
4. Using the multiplier capitalize the value of property (See AIR 1973 S.C. 701).
8.10 EXPERT’S VALUATION
When claimant produces remarks of experts regarding market value, the court may
act upon it if the materials on the basis of which the report has been prepared are
produced in the court and its authenticity is proved (AIR 1995 S.C. 840).
8. 11 LAND WITH BUILDING
Definition of land Under Sec. 3(a) of the L.A.Act ‘land’ includes benefits to arise out of land
A P RANDHIR

37
and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything attached to earth
(See AIR 1978 S.C. 515; 2005(1) SCC 553).
The land with a building should be taken as a single unit. But it is difficult to get
comparable sales with regard to such properties. Also see (AIR 2002 SC 1423; AIR 1988
SC 943). Then value of land and building has to be determined separately.
8.12 GARDEN LANDS
Separate compensation cannot be awarded for fruit bearing trees standing on the
land acquired (AIR 2002 S.C. 1423; AIR 1991 S.C.2027).
Either market value of the land including trees treating them as timber, or annual net
income of fruit bearing trees multiplied by a proper multiplier should be given. When
market value is determined on the basis of the yield from the trees or a plantation the
multiplier shall be 8 and in the case of agricultural properties it shall be 12 (maximum) (AIR
2002 SC 1423; 2005(3) KLT 408).
Tree growth cannot be valued with reference to its horticultural value or value of
yield. Timber value should be given (AIR 1988 S.C. 943).
The High Court has recognized the method of conducting test tapping of rubber
trees for determining the annual income (1980 KLT 800).
8.13 HOUSE SITE WITH FRUIT BEARING TREES
To value a site as house site and then add to it the value of the trees is duplication. Only
one of the two has to be valued (AIR 1970 Madras 184). But the Andhra Pradesh High
Court has disagreed with this view (AIR 1981 A.P.310). The view of Andhra Pradesh High
Court is said to be correct. (1981 KLT 913).
8.14 LEASE
Compensation shall be apportioned between the landlord and the tenant according
A P RANDHIR

38
to the value of their interests (1958 KLJ.613; 1994(5) SCC 239; 1997(5) JT 623; 2003(2)
KLT 394; AIR 1971 SC 1253).
8.15 EASEMENT
Easement is an interest in the property. The following criteria will arise for consideration in
1) To what extent the value of the servient tenement is reduced by the existence of
easement rights.
2) To what extent is the value of the dominant tenement reduced by the extinction of the
easement right (1975 KLT 497; AIR 2001 SC 3431).
Easement of Necessity
Easement of necessity is not extinguished by acquisition (AIR 2005 SC 954).
8.16 MORTGAGE
Where a mortgaged property is acquired the mortgagee is entitled to the mortgage
money out of the compensation (Sec. 73(2) T.P. Act). That claim has preference and can
be enforced though the principal amount on the mortgage has not become due (Sec. 73(3)
T.P. Act).
8.17 DAMAGES FOR SEVERANCE (S. 23 Clause thirdly and S.49(2)
Clause thirdly of S. 23 entitles a person to compensation for the damage caused, if any, to
a part of his land by the acquisition of another part. The claimant must prove the fact that
he suffered injury as well as the extent of the injury (1996(2) KLT 58; 1968 S.C. 1425; AIR
1975 S.C. 1097; AIR 1990 S.C. 2192).
8.18 BUSINESS DISPLACEMENT
A P RANDHIR

39
(Section 23 Clauses Fourthly & Fifthly).
A person who is compelled to stop his business on account of acquisition cannot
claim increase in compensation on the basis of loss of earnings till he resettled in
business. Only loss caused to the claimant at the time of taking possession is
contemplated (1997 (2) SCC 640). In the case of shifting of business the claimant is
entitled to transport charges only (1997 (2) SCC 640 & 2004 (7) SCC 388).
8.19 DOCUMENTS RELATING TO SMALLER EXTENT DEDUCTION:
While fixing the market rate, very often, documents of smaller extent would be taken
as the basis. The normal rule in fixing compensation for large extent of land with reference
to the value shown in the sale document of lesser extent is that there must be suitable
deduction. It is common knowledge that larger extent of property invariably fetch less when
compared to smaller extent. No prudent buyer would buy large extent of land by quoting
the price prevailing in the market for a small piece of land.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court, Atma Singh v State of Haryana (2008) 2 SCC 568, by
placing reliance on some of the earlier Judgments regarding deduction in the case of
smaller extent when compared to the larger extent acquired, explained the legal position
thus:- Chimanlal Hargovinddas V Special Land Acquisition officer it was held as follows :
Firstly while a smaller plot is within the reach of many, a large block of land will have to
be developed by preparing a layout, carving out roads, leaving open space, plotting out
smaller plots, waiting for purchasers (meanwhile the invested money will be blocked up)
and the hazards of an entrepreneur. The factor can be discounted by making a deduction
by way of an allowance at an appropriate rate ranging approximately between 20 per cent
to 50 per cent to account for land required to be set apart for carving out lands and plotting
out small plots. The discounting will to some extent also depend on whether it is a rural
area or urban area, whether building activity is picking up, and whether waiting period
during which the capital of the entrepreneur would be locked up, will be longer or shorter
and the attendant hazards.
A P RANDHIR

40
Basant Kumar V Union of India,
Land was acquired for planned development of Delhi and in the other two cases for
housing boards and a deduction of 33% was applied.
The reasons given for the principle that price fetched for small plots cannot form
safe basis for valuation of large tracts of land, according to cases referred to above, are
that substantial area is used for development of sites like laying out roads, drains, sewers,
water and electricity lines and other civic amenities. Expenses are also incurred in
providing these basic amenities. That apart it takes considerable period in carving out the
roads making sewers and drains and waiting for the purchasers. Meanwhile the invested
money is blocked up and the return on the investment flows after a considerable period of
time. In order to make up for the area of land which is used in providing civic amenities
and the waiting period during which the capital of the entrepreneur gets locked up a
deduction from 20% onward, depending upon the facts of each case, is made."
8.20 FIXATION OF COMPENSATION GUIDING FACTORS
There are well accepted norms for the purpose of fixing the market rate. While
fixing the market value, the Land Acquisition Officer is required to consider the location of
the property, its advantages as well as potential. Neither the document showing the
inflated rate nor a document of distress sale is relevant for the purpose of fixing the land
value. Courts and Tribunals have to sit in the arm-chair of a willing seller as well as a
willing purchaser and to arrive at the market rate by taking into account all the positive and
negative factors. The purpose for which the property was acquired, the nature of the
property, presence of roads, electricity, educational institutions, hospital facilities and other
infrastructural facilities available in the area are all relevant factors for the purpose of
arriving at the market value.
Ambya Kalya Mhatre (dead) through L R and Ors V/s State of Maharashtra, 2012 (1)
Mh.L.J. 9
Scope of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is very wide and demand for additional
claim even if not made before reference Court, the same can be claimed across the bar
even at this stage.
A P RANDHIR

41
8.21 Publication of preliminary Notification
Kulsam R. Nadiadwala Vs. State of Maharashtra 2012(2) Law Summary (S.C.) 121 =
2012(5) ALD 70(SC)= 2012 AIR SCW 3079 = AIR 2012 SC 2718.
Sec.4(1) - Publication of preliminary Notification and power of Officers thereupon Stated -
There are two requirements for issuance of Notification u/Sec.4 of Act - First requirement
is that Notification requires to be published in Official Gazette and second requirement is
that acquiring authority should cast public notices of substance of such Notification in a
convenient place in locality in which land proposed to be acquired is situate and both
contentions are cumulative and they are mandatory - Non-compliance with mandatory
requirement of Sec.4(1) invalidates entire acquisition proceedings - Merely because
parties concerned were aware of acquisition proceedings are served with individual
notices does not make position alter when statute makes. it very clear that all
procedures/modes have to be strictly complied with in manner provided therein - Merely
because land owners failed to submit their objections within 15 days after publication of
Notification u/Sec.4(1) of Act, authorities cannot be permitted to claim that it need not be
strictly resorted to.
8.22 List of documentary evidence can be produced for determining the market
value.
1. Revenue record relating to measurement of the land acquired.
2. Revenue records like 7/12 to show which crops are grown and how many
time they take the crop in a year.
3. Whether land is agricultural or non-agriculture.
4. Documents regarding the ownership of the land.
5. Sale deed of the same land or neighboring land.
A P RANDHIR

42
6. Valuation report of the land.
7. Previous award of the court.
8. Facilities available in the area to show the development of the area.
9. Irrigation facilities or well or other source of water.
10. Other income dependent on the acquired land.
11. Other loss occur due to acquisition.
12. Trees and other structure standing on the land.
13. Evidence relating to part of land due to acquisition.
8.23 Determination of compensation on the basis of Previous award.
1. 1997(2) G.L.H. 773, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bharuch Versus Motibhai
Mohanbhai. Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has observed as under. Land Acquisition Act,
1894 - Ss.23 and 54 - Market value-Determination of when comparable sale instances
Market value of land in the same village not available- of land is determined by taking into
consideration by amount awarded in respect of similar land acquired some years before
and increasing by way of appreciation from the in the adjoining village the said amount by
10 % for each year date of the said notification u/s. 4(1) published in respect of land in
award till question the Basis adopted for determination of marketvalue is legal, just and
reasonable not warranting interference by the High Court under S.54 of the Act.
A. I. R. 2001 S. C. 2424, Thakarsibhai Devjibhai v/s Executive Engineer, Gujarat.
Observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme court in Para (10) to (12) are as under. 10.
Next, in the present case, we find the High Court rightly relied on Exh. 16 which is the
foundation of the submission on behalf of the claimants. The High Court, with reference to
this records: "As observed earlier, it was neither brought to the notice of the Reference
Court nor it is brought to the notice of this Court that the previous award Exh. 16 of the
A P RANDHIR

43
Reference Court was in any manner modified by the appellate Court. Therefore, in our
opinion, award Exh. 16 had become final between the parties. The respondents had led
sufficient evidence to show that the acquired lands of award Exh. 16 and the acquired
lands in the present case were in all respects similar lands. It was never brought to the
notice of the court that the lands acquired in the present case have certain disadvantages
in comparison to the agricultural lands of award Exh. 16 which were previously acquired.
Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Reference Court was justified in
placing reliance on the previous award Exh. 16 of the Reference court."
11. After accepting this award Ex. 16 as the foundation, while fixing the compensation, it
fell into error when it reduced the compensation by 25%. The reason for this doing so by
the High Court is reproduced below : "Therefore, if award Exh. 16 is to be taken as basis
for the purpose of determination of the market value of the acquired lands in the present
case, some deduction will have to be made. At the same time, because of distance
between the village site and the acquired lands, which was more than the distance
between the village site and acquired lands of award Exh. 16, some deduction shall also
have to be made. In our opinion, if the deduction of large area and small area coupled with
further deduction for distance is made in the present case, then it would be reasonable to
deduct 25% from the market price arrived at in respect of the acquired lands of award Exh.
16."
2. As we have said above the High Court fell into error by reducing the quantum of
compensation on this basis. The reduction has been made for two reasons, one that the
present acquisition is of larger area and the second the distance between the land under
acquisition and Ex. 16 is about 5 kms. With reference to question of acquisition being of a
larger area, the error is, when we scan we find for the acquisition of each land owner, it
could not be said that the acquisition is of a large area. Largeness is merely when each
land holders land is clubbed together then the area becomes large. Each landowners
holdings are of small area. Even otherwise visioning in the line with submission for the
State we find Ex.16 is about two hectares of land which cannot be said to be of small piece
of land. So far the other question of distance between the two classes of lands, that by
itself cannot derogate the claim of the claimant unless there are some such other materials
to show that quality and potentiality of such land is inferior. However, distance between the
A P RANDHIR

44
land under Ex. 16 and the present land even if they are 5 kms. apart would not be
relevant, the relevancy could be, their distances from the Viramgam town. We find, as per
map produced by the State the present acquired land is about 3 kms. away from it, while
the land under Ex. 16 is about two kilometers away from it. This difference is not such to
lead to reduce the rate of compensation, specially on the facts of this case. In the present
case, as we have recorded above, it has been found that the quality including potentiality
of land between Exh. 16 and the present one are similar. No evidence has been led on
behalf of the State to find difference between the two. In view of this, the inference drawn
by the High Court for reducing the compensation by Rs. 10/- per sq. mtr. cannot be
sustained.
8.24. Best Method For Awarding Compensation
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4, 23 - Land acquisition - Compensation - Compensation
already fixed by High Court in earlier proceedings - In one such case Supreme Court
approved the rate fixed - Held, the best method for awarding compensation would be to
look at the earlier Judgments and awards as such High Court cannot be faulted for having
fixed compensation on the basis of earlier judgments. (Bhim Singh & Ors. Vs State of
Haryana & Anr.) 2003(2) Apex Court Judgments 447 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4, 6, 18 & 30 - Compensation - Claim for apportionment
-In land acquisition proceedings, Government cannot and does not acquire its own interest
- Interest which is acquired in land acquisition proceedings are interest of 3rd parties.
(Meher Rusi Dalal Vs Union of India & Ors.) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 184 (S.C.) :
2005(1) Civil Court Cases 283 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4, 6 18, & 23 - Land Acquisition - Compensation -
Comparable sale - Guiding principles are: (i) The sale is within a reasonable time of the
date of notification under S.4(1); (ii) It should be a bona fide transaction; (iii) It should be of
the land acquired or of the land adjacent to the land acquired; and (iv) it should possess
similar advantages. (Hans Raj Sharma (Dead) by Lrs. Vs Collector Land Acquisition, Tehsil
A P RANDHIR

45
& District Doda) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 529 (S.C.) : 2005(2) Civil Court Cases
302 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4, 6 18, & 23 - Land Acquisition - Compensation -
Comparable sale - Instances of sale of small tracks of land cannot be the basis of
determining the market value of large tracks of land, unless suitable deduction is made in
respect of development charges and land to be set apart - How much deductions are to be
made depends upon nature of land, its topography and special features and state of its
development so as to make it suitable for being adapted for immediate use. (Hans Raj
Sharma (Dead) by Lrs. Vs Collector Land Acquisition, Tehsil & District Doda) 2005(1) Apex
Court Judgments 529 (S.C.) : 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 302 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4 & 23 - Land acquisition - Compensation - Normally in
cases where compensation is awarded on yield basis, multiplier of 10 is considered proper
and appropriate. (Assistant Commissioner-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Bellary Vs Sri
S.T.Pompanna Setty) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 374 (S.C.) : 2005(2) Civil Court
Cases 402 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4(1), 18 & 23 - Acquisition of land - Compensation -
Market value fixed at Rs.2/- per sq. yd. - Reference Court rejected some references and in
some references enhanced market value of land to Rs.8/- per sq. yard - High Court in
appeal enhanced market value of lands to Rs.9/- per sq. yd. and Rs.8/- per sq. yd. having
regard to the locations and other factors - Judgment of High Court, upheld. (U.P.State
Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. Vs Shakti Bhatta Udyog & Ors.) 2005(1) Apex Court
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.4(1), 6, 34 & 48 - Land acquisition - Compensation -
Earlier acquisition proceedings were declared null and void in the suit instituted by the land
owner himself as such he is not entitled to compensation or interest for the anterior period
- When earlier acquisition proceedings were declared null and void then it was for the land
owner to take possession of his land by taking appropriate legal proceedings - Land owner
is entitled to get rent or damages for use and occupation for the period the Government
A P RANDHIR

46
retains possession of the property - Subsequent acquisition proceedings initiated - Held, it
is just and equitable that Collector may also determine the rent or damages for use of the
property to which the land owner is entitled while determining the compensation amount
payable to the land owner for the acquisition of the property - Provision of S.48 of the Act
is applicable - For delayed payment of such amount appropriate interest at prevailing bank
rate may be awarded. (R.L.Jain (D) by Lrs. Vs DDA & Ors.) 2004(1) Apex Court
Judgments 412 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.11-A, 6(2) - “Within a period of two years from the date of
publication of the declaration” - Meaning - Various modes for publication provided are (a)
publication in the official gazette (b) publication in two daily newspapers circulating in the
locality in which the land is situate of which at least one shall be in the regional language
and (c) Public notice at convenience place in the locality - Two years period starts to run
from the last of the dates out of the three modes of publication. (Bihar State Housing
Board Vs State of Bihar & Ors.) 2004(1) Apex Court Judgments 285 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.11, 11(2) - There can never be two awards - one under
S.11 of the Act and another u/s 11(2) of the Act over the same land acquired. (Orissa
Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Vs Supai Munda & Ors.) 2004(1) Apex
Court Judgments 45 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.16 - Acquisition of land - Easement of right of necessity
like a right of passage enjoyed by adjoining land owner do not extinguish by reason of
acquisition of land by State authority. (H.P.State Electricity Board & Ors. Vs Shiv K.Sharma
& Ors.) 2005(1) Apex Court Judgments 628 (S.C.) : 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 603 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.17 - Acquisition of land - By invoking urgency clause -
Challenged after announcing of award and vesting of land in State Govt. - Not tenable -
Merely because payment has been made during pendency of suit after land vested in
State Govt. does not enable plaintiff to impugn acquisition. (Union of India Vs Ujagar
Singh) AIR 2003 P&H 297
A P RANDHIR

47
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.17(3-A), 23(1-A) and 28 - Acquisition of land by private
negotiation and possession taken prior to issuance of notification u/s 4 - State by several
resolutions provided for rental compensation payable to title holders of lands - Writ petition
praying interest on rental compensation for delayed payment - High Court allowed interest
at 12% - Liability for rental compensation does not have its source under the Act -
Question of equities however required that appellants should pay interest at 6% p.a. from
1.4.2000. (State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs Maimuma Banu & Ors.) 2003(2) Apex Court
Judgments 450 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.18 - Co-owners - One co-owner is entitled to have the
benefit of the enhanced compensation given in respect of the other co-owners in a
reference made at his instance in respect of the land acquired, which belonged to all of
them, jointly, irrespective of rejection of reference qua him on ground of belated
application. (The Jalandhar Improvement Trust Vs The State of Punjab & Ors.) 2003(1)
Apex Court Judgments 13 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.18 - Curt exercising jurisdiction under Section 18 cannot
decide the question of title of the State over the acquired land. (M/s. Ahad Brothers Vs
State of M.P. & Anr.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 553 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.18 - Land acquisition - Compensation - Market value -
Sale transaction showing land far away from acquired land - Sale took place much after
issuance of notification - Sale transaction cannot be relied upon for determining market
value of land. (State of Punjab Vs Nek Singh) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 137 (P&H)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.18 - Reference to Court - Notice sent u/s 12(2) of the Act -
Notice received back after proper service - Respondent denied to have received the notice
- Respondent an illiterate person and cannot put his signature - It clearly demonstrates
that respondent did not receive notice - Contention of appellant that reference was time
barred must fail. (Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Vs Supai
Munda & Ors.) 2004(1) Apex Court Judgments 45 (S.C.)
A P RANDHIR

48
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.18 - Reference - Right to reference accrues only when
award is not accepted - Once award is accepted, no legal right survives for claiming a
reference - An agreement between parties as regard the value of land acquired by State is
binding on the parties - So long such agreement and consequently the consent awards are
not sent aside in an appropriate proceeding by a Court of law having jurisdiction in relation
thereto, the same remain binding. (State of Karnataka & Anr. Vs Sangappa Dyavappa
Biradar & Ors.) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 307 (S.C.)
Claim For Higher Compensation In Respect Of Trees.
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.18, 3(a) - Trees - Claim for - Reference made for
determination of amount of compensation payable for the 'land' acquired - Expression
'land' is inclusive of benefits to arise out of the land and things attached to the earth or
permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth - Reference Court is bound to
adjudicate the claim for higher compensation in respect of trees. (Hans Raj Sharma
(Dead) by Lrs. Vs Collector Land Acquisition, Tehsil & District Doda) 2005(1) Apex Court
Land Acquisition Act, 1884, Ss.18, 20 & 26 - Reference to civil Court - Claimant not
participating when matter was taken up - It is not proper to dismiss the reference in default.
(Khazan Singh Vs Union of India) AIR 2002 S.C. 726
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.18 & 30 - Compensation - Dispute as to apportionment -
Person who had notice of acquisition proceedings and who, by virtue of S.50 is debarred
from filing a reference under Section 18 cannot be allowed to apply for a reference u/s 30
of the Act. (Meher Rusi Dalal Vs Union of India & Ors.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 283
(S.C.)
State Cannot Be Said To Be A Person Interested
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.18 & 30 - Land acquisition - Compensation - Market
value - Reference Court determined market value of acquired land and recorded finding
that appellant was having ownership right on acquired land - High Court modified
A P RANDHIR

49
compensation amount and held appellant entitled for compensation only to extent of lease
hold interest in acquired land and that appellant was not owner of the land - Not only in the
notification acquiring the land, name of appellant was recorded as owner but also in the
revenue record appellant was shown as owner - If State was the owner of the land in
question then there was no reason for it to acquire its own land - State cannot be said to
be a person interested to agitate any claim either under S.18 or under S.30 of the Act -
Impugned order holding appellant had only lease-hold interest in land cannot be sustained.
(M/s. Ahad Brothers Vs State of M.P. & Anr.) 2005(1) Civil Court Cases 553 (S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Ss.21, 18 - Land acquisition - Compensation - Large area of
22 Hectares acquired from claimant company - Sale instances of small pieces of land are
irrelevant - Company purchased land just 4-5 years before acquisition but not producing
sale deeds for determining valuation of land - No commercial or industrial development
after purchase till acquisition - Enhancement of compensation by High Court ignoring such
circumstances not proper - Case remitted for fresh consideration. (Special Land
Acquisition Officer Vs Indian Standard Metal Co. Ltd.) 2004(2) Apex Court Judgments 605
(S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.23 - Land Acquisition - Compensation - Market value -
Market value cannot be fixed on basis of a basic valuation register maintained by
registering authority for collection of stamp duty - Market value must be determined on the
basis of sale deeds of comparable lands. (Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Sahaswan District
Badaun through its Secretary Vs Bipin Kumar & Anr.) 2004(1) Apex Court Judgments 425
(S.C.)
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.23 - Land acquisition - Market value - Collector fixed
Rs.6000/- per bigha and Reference Court enhanced to Rs.10,000/- per bigha and the
same confirmed by High Court - Claimants had sold some land which was part of land to
be acquired just a few months earlier - Sale price was Rs.7500/- per bigha - In another
award whereby land was acquired Collector fixed market value at Rs.12,000 per bigha and
High Court had enhanced it to Rs.32,000 per bigha - Two conflicting judgments of same
High Court - Sale deeds referred t by High Court were not relied on either by claimant or
A P RANDHIR

Land Acquisition Act Comparison

Land Acquisition Act Comparison

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Land Acquisition Act Comparison

Similaire à Land Acquisition Act Comparison (20)

Plus de Arjun Randhir

Plus de Arjun Randhir (13)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Land Acquisition Act Comparison