9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Enhancement of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 2. Reliance on specific documents for determining compensation. 3. Consideration of the potential and strategic location of the acquired land. 4. Application of the formula for annual increase in land value. Summary: 1. Enhancement of Compensation: The appeals challenge the High Court's judgment dated 20th September 2010, which dismissed the appeals for enhancement of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LA Act). The Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) had assessed the market value of the acquired land at different rates per acre based on the type of land. Dissatisfied with the LAC's assessment, the appellants sought a reference u/s 18 of the LA Act, leading to the Additional District Judge (ADJ) fixing higher compensation. The appellants, still seeking further enhancement, filed Regular First Appeals, which were dismissed by the High Court, prompting the present appeals. 2. Reliance on Specific Documents: The High Court relied on a single document, Ex. P-15, a conveyance deed registered for sale by Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC) to the Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC), to determine the compensation. The High Court found this document most relevant as it was closest in time to the Notification u/s 4 of the LA Act dated 11.1.2001. The appellants argued that the High Court erred in relying solely on this document and ignoring other relevant documents showing higher land values. 3. Consideration of Potential and Strategic Location: The appellants contended that the acquired land was strategically located near various commercial establishments and had significant future potential. They produced site plans and government documents indicating higher land values. The Reference Court had acknowledged the industrial, commercial, and residential potential of the land, stating that it was not merely agricultural land. The appellants argued that the High Court failed to consider these aspects adequately. 4. Application of Annual Increase Formula: The Supreme Court referred to its judgment in Asharfi and Ors. v. State of Haryana, where a formula of 12% per annum increase in land value was applied. The Court noted that from 1993 to 2001, there was a period of attrition in land rates. Therefore, it applied the 12% increase formula for only four years instead of the entire period, resulting in a valuation of Rs. 770/- per square yard in 2001. After deducting one-third, the net valuation was Rs. 514/- per square yard. The Supreme Court found this increase reasonable and fixed the compensation accordingly. Conclusion: The appeals were allowed to the extent of fixing the compensation at Rs. 514/- per square yard for the acquired land of the appellants.
|
