2012 (7) TMI 1036 - SC - Indian Laws

Determining the amount of compensation at the rate of ₹ 25/- per square meter - the Reference Court had taken notice of the fact that the acquired land was in the proximity of National Highway No.4, Panvel-Sion Highway and the construction of Thane Creek Bridge which brought various villages including village Roadpali (Kolhekhar) close to Bombay. The Reference Court also noted that civic amenities were available to Panvel town prior to 1970 and industrial estates had been developed at Taloja and Panvel and concluded that the acquired land was available for non-agricultural use and the only obstruction was the absence of conversion. The High Court did not advert to the factors noted by the Reference Court and reduced the amount of compensation by mechanically applying the distance criteria, i.e., distance of the acquired land from Bombay-Pune Highway adopted in the earlier judgments. Therefore, the impugned judgment and order cannot be sustained. In the result, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and order are set aside and the one passed by the Reference Court for payment of compensation to the appellants at the rate of ₹ 25/- per square meter is restored. The respondents are directed to pay the balance amount to the appellants with all other statutory benefits and interest within three months from today.

Issues Involved:
1. Determination of market value of the acquired land.
2. Entitlement to enhanced compensation.
3. Validity of the reduction in compensation by the High Court.
4. Deduction towards development charges.
5. Judicial notice of non-agricultural potentiality.
6. Application of distance criteria in compensation determination.
7. Discrimination between similarly situated landowners.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Determination of Market Value of the Acquired Land:
The Government of Maharashtra acquired large tracts of land in different villages for the New Bombay Project, including the appellants' land in Roadpali Village. The initial compensation ranged from Rs. 1.75 to Rs. 2.50 per square meter. The appellants later sought redetermination under Section 28A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, resulting in a slightly increased compensation. The Reference Court eventually fixed the market value at Rs. 25 per square meter, considering the land's non-agricultural potential and its proximity to significant infrastructure like highways and industrial estates.

2. Entitlement to Enhanced Compensation:
The appellants argued for higher compensation, citing the land's proximity to major highways and industrial areas, and referenced higher compensations awarded in similar cases. The Reference Court supported their claim, noting the land's non-agricultural potential and existing amenities. The court emphasized that the land was ready for non-agricultural use, except for the formal conversion.

3. Validity of the Reduction in Compensation by the High Court:
The High Court reduced the compensation to Rs. 20 per square meter for land within 500 meters of the Bombay-Pune Highway and Rs. 18 per square meter for land beyond that distance. This decision was based on earlier judgments applying a distance criterion. The Supreme Court found this approach mechanical and not considering the specific factors noted by the Reference Court, such as the land's non-agricultural potential and proximity to developed areas.

4. Deduction Towards Development Charges:
The High Court's decision included a 15% deduction towards development charges. However, the Supreme Court noted that such deductions are generally applied when the land is undeveloped or under-developed, but should be modulated based on the land's existing development. The Reference Court had already considered the land's readiness for non-agricultural use, making the High Court's deduction unjustified.

5. Judicial Notice of Non-Agricultural Potentiality:
The Reference Court took judicial notice of the land's non-agricultural potential, supported by the proximity to highways, industrial estates, and existing civic amenities. This judicial notice was based on established legal principles, recognizing the land's potential without requiring formal proof.

6. Application of Distance Criteria in Compensation Determination:
The High Court's reliance on the distance from the Bombay-Pune Highway to determine compensation was deemed inappropriate by the Supreme Court. The Reference Court had considered more relevant factors, such as the land's overall potential and existing infrastructure, making the distance criterion less significant.

7. Discrimination Between Similarly Situated Landowners:
The appellants argued that their compensation should match that awarded to other landowners in similar circumstances. The Supreme Court agreed, noting that the land in question was similarly situated to other lands that had received higher compensation. The Reference Court's determination of Rs. 25 per square meter was restored, ensuring equitable treatment.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's judgment and restoring the Reference Court's determination of compensation at Rs. 25 per square meter. The respondents were directed to pay the balance amount with statutory benefits and interest within three months. Additionally, the Court issued directions to ensure the landowners received the compensation directly, minimizing the risk of exploitation by middlemen.

← Previous Next →