2013 (4) TMI 1000 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Claims for enhancement of compensation for lands acquired u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
2. Methodology for determining compensation.
3. Uniform rate of compensation.
4. Deduction for development charges.
5. Cumulative annual increase in land value.
6. Application of belting system.

Summary:

1. Claims for Enhancement of Compensation:
All matters involve claims for enhancement of compensation for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in several states including Punjab, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and the Union Territory of Chandigarh. The Supreme Court granted leave in all Special Leave Petitions and listed them as Civil Appeals.

2. Methodology for Determining Compensation:
The Court took up the matters state-wise, starting with Haryana. Specific cases were selected to govern the rest. The High Court awarded compensation at Rs. 235/- per sq. yard uniformly, despite different land types. The Reference Court and High Court applied various methods to assess compensation, including comparison with sale transactions and considering the land's potential for development.

3. Uniform Rate of Compensation:
In cases like Smt. Ashrafi and Ors., the High Court fixed compensation at Rs. 220/- per sq. yard, while in Smt. Kamlesh Kumari's case, the High Court reduced the rate from Rs. 325/- per sq. yard to Rs. 90/- per sq. yard but later assessed it at Rs. 280/- per sq. yard. The Supreme Court found these compensations inadequate and revised them to Rs. 325/- per sq. yard.

4. Deduction for Development Charges:
The Court addressed the issue of deduction for development charges. In cases like Sucha Singh and Ors., the deduction of 40% was deemed excessive, and a more realistic cut of 33 1/3 per cent was applied. The Court emphasized that deductions should reflect the land's situation and development needs.

5. Cumulative Annual Increase in Land Value:
For cases like Mukesh Kumar and others, the Court accepted the argument for a cumulative annual increase of 12% in land value, rather than a flat rate, to reflect the sharp rise in land prices. The compensation was reassessed by applying this cumulative rate from the date of the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.

6. Application of Belting System:
The Court found the belting system inappropriate in cases like Mukesh Kumar, where the High Court had resorted to it. The Supreme Court discarded the belting system and reassessed compensation based on cumulative annual increase.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court revised compensation rates in various cases, applying a cumulative annual increase and reducing excessive deductions for development charges. The revised compensation rates were applied uniformly across similar cases, ensuring just compensation for the acquired lands. The parties were directed to bear their own costs.