9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Determination of the true multiplier for compensation calculation. 2. Methodology for determining market value of acquired land. 3. Validity of the capitalisation method and the appropriate number of years' purchase. 4. Evaluation of potential value and appropriate compensation for agricultural land. Summary: Issue 1: Determination of the true multiplier for compensation calculation. The primary issue in these appeals is the determination of the true multiplier to be adopted in calculating the compensation for land acquired around 1962-63, based on the capitalisation principle. Issue 2: Methodology for determining market value of acquired land. The Beas Project required the acquisition of approximately 70,000 acres of land. The Land Acquisition Officer initially adopted the principle of capitalisation, using a 20 years' purchase rule to determine the market value. This method was contested, and the District Judge, upon reference u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, also adopted the capitalisation method but did not consider other well-known methods of valuation such as bona fide transactions or expert opinions. Issue 3: Validity of the capitalisation method and the appropriate number of years' purchase. The Supreme Court noted that the capitalisation method was the only method adopted in these cases. The Court reviewed various precedents where different multipliers (33 1/3, 25, 20, 16 1/2, 11, and 8) were used based on the prevailing interest rates and the nature of the property. The Court concluded that for the years 1962 and 1963, a 15 years' purchase rule was more appropriate than the 20 years' purchase rule used by the lower courts. Issue 4: Evaluation of potential value and appropriate compensation for agricultural land. The Court found no evidence suggesting that the lands had potential value beyond agricultural use. The lands were situated in a hilly tract with no potential buyers other than for the project. The Court held that the compensation should be reduced by one-fourth, applying a 15 years' purchase rule instead of 20 years. Consequently, the compensation for the best category of land was reduced from Rs. 1,000 per kanal to Rs. 750 per kanal, with similar reductions for other categories. The claimants were entitled to a 15% solatium on the revised compensation and interest as ordered by the District Judge. Conclusion: The appeals were allowed in part, modifying the compensation awarded by the lower courts based on a 15 years' purchase rule. The parties were ordered to bear their own costs.
|
