Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the impugned judgment passed by the High Court by reversing the judgment and award of the reference court is vitiated on the ground of erroneous finding and also error in law? 2. For what award the appellants are entitled to in this appeal? Summary: Issue 1: Erroneous Finding and Error in Law The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court's reversal of the reference court's judgment was vitiated by erroneous findings and legal errors. The State of Maharashtra acquired land for industrial development, and the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs. 50,000/- per hectare. The appellants sought enhancement of compensation u/s 34 of the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961. The reference court re-determined the market value based on sale instances of nearby plots, awarding compensation at Rs. 5/- per sq. feet. The High Court set aside this award, relying on judgments such as Saraswati Devi Vs. U.P. Government and Union of India Vs. Zila Singh, which held that small plot sale prices cannot determine the market value of vast land stretches. The Supreme Court found the High Court's reliance misplaced and upheld the reference court's findings that the acquired land had non-agricultural potentiality and was comparable to the plots in the sale deeds. The reference court's judgment was based on cogent and legal evidence, and the High Court's reversal was deemed erroneous both in fact and law. Issue 2: Entitlement to AwardThe Supreme Court affirmed the reference court's award, which included enhanced compensation at Rs. 5/- per sq. feet, 30% solatium, interest, and additional compound interest. The court directed respondent No.3 - M.I.D.C. to issue the Demand Draft in favor of the landowners/appellants or their legal representatives or deposit the same in their bank accounts within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and submit the compliance report before the reference court. The appeal was allowed with no order as to cost.
|