9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nds according to the appellants are situated on the main road known as the Mall or Delhi Karnal Road near to National Highway No.1. They claimed ₹ 60 per sq. yard along with interest and solatium. So far as the acquisitions covered by the Notification dated 13.11.1959 is concerned, the Land Acquisition Collector divided the acquired land into two blocks and fixed the market value of land in these blocks separately. As regards Bagh Nehri land, the rate was fixed at ₹ 4,000/- per bigha and Gair Mumkin land @Rs.3,500/- per bigha in respect of block A. In respect of Block B, he fixed the market value of garden land @Rs,3,500/- per bigha and for other land @Rs.3,000/- per bigha. So far as the acquisition relating to Notification date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that the High court erred in not taking note of comparable cases and placed reliance on instances of sale which cannot be termed to be contemporaneous. With reference to the location of the acquired land, it was submitted that the market value as fixed is certainly on the lower side. Judicial notice can be taken note of rapid upward trend in prices and, therefore, for the subsequent notification, higher rates were fixed. Per contra, Mr. H.L. Agrawala, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the High Court made detailed analysis of the factual position and has rightly fixed the market value. There is no material to substantiate the plea of upward trend in prices. Where large area is the subject mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer, Vizagapatam (AIR 1939 P.C. 98) that the compensation must be determined by reference to the price which a willing vendor might reasonably expect to receive from the willing purchaser. While considering the market value disinclination of the vendor to part with his land and the urgent necessity of the purchaser to buy it must alike be disregarded. Neither must be considered as acting under any compulsion. The value of the land is not to be estimated as its value to the purchaser. But similarly this does not mean that the fact that some particular purchaser might desire the land more than others is to be disregarded. The wish of a particular purchaser, though not his compulsion may always be taken into consideration for what it is wort ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inarayan Setty (AIR 1959 SC 429). Keeping the aforesaid principles in view we feel that on the basis of the instances pressed into service by the acquiring authority and the land owner-appellants, the average can be fixed @ ₹ 61.50/- for both the notifications in question by adopting the extent of plotted area as done by the High Court which appears to be appropriate in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the rate per sq. yard can be fixed @Rs.40/-. Though it was contended that there was marked variation in price relating to the instances of sale, vis--vis second notification, it does not appear, on the basis of evidence on record, that the fluctuation was of very high magnitude. The marginal differences noticed do not warran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
