A legal case revolving around a dispute over compensation for acquired land has sparked debates on the relevance of sale deeds in determining market value. The court’s legal analysis delves into the nuances of assessing compensation, weighing the validity of various sale instances to reach a just decision. Stay tuned as we explore the complexities of land acquisition and compensation disputes through the lens of legal scrutiny.
Facts
- Land admeasuring 1.80 acres in village Anniyalam, Denkanikottai Taluk, District Dharamapuri, Tamil Nadu was acquired for public purpose.
- Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 27.09.1990/11.01.1991.
- Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 12.12.1991.
- Learned Reference Court assessed compensation at Rs.2,18,333/- per acre.
- Land Acquisition Officer appealed the decision, leading to High Court partly allowing the appeal and determining compensation at Rs.232.45 per cent.
- The land owner requested a reference under Section 18 of the Act to the District Court – Reference Court.
- The Collector, Land Acquisition, issued an award on 16.03.1993 setting the compensation for the acquired land at Rs.39,506/- per hectare or Rs.16,000/- per acre.
Also Read: Judicial Review of Delayed Writ Petition
Issue
- The issue before the Court is whether the landowners are entitled to the enhanced amount of compensation relying on the document at Ex.C1 dated 11.01.1990 or the amount determined by the High Court.
- The Reference Court and the High Court’s handling of the matter is unsatisfactory according to the reviewing judges.
Also Read: Ownership Dispute: Legal Analysis on Admission and Decree
Arguments
- Learned Counsel argues that the Reference Court rightly awarded enhanced compensation at Rs.2183.33 per cent based on a sale deed dated 11.01.1990, where similar land was sold at Rs.2977 per cent.
- The High Court reduced the compensation to Rs.232.45 per cent without providing sufficient reasons.
- Appellant’s Counsel contends that the High Court erred in reducing the compensation amount and in disregarding the genuine sale deed Ex.C1, which accurately reflected the market value.
- The High Court rightly discarded the sale deed Ex.C1 executed by the land owner near the acquired land as it was in favor of his relative.
- The Land Acquisition Officer and the High Court relied on sale instance Ex.R2 – Item No.9 for 1 acre of land in Survey No.359, executed in January 1990.
- The document Ex.C1 dated 11.01.1990, relied upon by the land owner, was for a small parcel of land (5 ½ cent) and cannot be considered reliable.
- Ex.R2 Item No.9 is deemed the best sale deed available for assessing the market value of the acquired land.
Also Read: Interpretation of Statutory Limitation under Section 263(2)
Analysis
- The market value was initially determined at Rs. 160 per cent by the Land Acquisition Officer.
- The Reference Court later increased the compensation to Rs. 2183.33 per cent based on a sale deed dated 11.01.1990 for 5 ½ cent at Rs. 2977 per cent.
- The sale deed Ex.C1 dated 11.01.1990, executed by the land owner himself, was considered a comparable instance despite being for a small parcel of land.
- The sale deed Ex.C1 was relied upon by both the Reference Court and the High Court in their decisions.
- The proximity in time and situation were factors that deemed the sale deed Ex.C1 as a relevant comparable instance for determining compensation.
- Date of compensation can be fixed considering the sale deed dated 11.01.1990 Ex.C1 with suitable deductions.
- Comparable sales of small areas can also be considered with deductions while fixing market value.
- The sale deed dated 11.01.1990 Ex.C1 was for a small parcel of land (5 1/2 cent).
- The land in question was acquired for a housing project.
Decision
- Sale deed dated 11.01.1990 was executed for a sale consideration of Rs.16,375/- for 5 ½ cent
- Market value assessed at Rs.1191 per cent after deducting 60 per cent
- Appellant – original claimant – entitled to compensation at Rs.1191 per cent with statutory benefits
- Present appeal partly allowed, modification of impugned Judgment and Order dated 30.07.2008 in AS No.1222 of 2001
Case Title: MUNUSAMY Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (2021 INSC 572)
Case Number: C.A. No.-000398-000398 / 2010
