9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (8) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard could be made without a proper notification under Section 6. Before he could initiate fresh proceedings, for the determination of compensation, one Smt. Suroj Kumari filed a writ petition before the High Court for quashing the award dated the 6th July 1961. The High Court quashed the award, directing the Land Acquisition Officer to proceed afresh in accordance with the provisions of law. The Land Acquisition Officer fell into an error again. He proceeded on the basis of the previous notices issued under Section 9 of the Act instead of issuing fresh notices, which the law contemplated ought to be issued after the publication of the notification under S. 6. He did not withdraw the award D/- the 6th July, 1961, and acted on the statements and evidence previously recorded, without giving opportunity to the claimants to put in additional evidence, if they so desired. The matter, therefore, came up again before the High Court and the second award made on 6th October, 1964, was also quashed, because it was based on no enquiry and was without any opportunity having been given to the claimants. Smt. Sarojkumari v. The State of Madhya Pradesh. which reports the decision of this Court. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer gave 10% for potential value besides the statutory 15% solatium. He also allowed 6% P. A. interest from the date possession was taken i.e., from 30-10-1964. till the payment was made. The Additional District Judge, who heard the references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, was of the view that the land had substantial value as a building-site on the date of the notification: houses were coming up in the vicinity of the Kasaridih abadi which was hardly 250 yards away from the acquired lands, and on the other side towards the north, lay the Uttai-Durg road with a poultry farm, a Bakery, Kaleys' bungalow and garrage, and bungalow of the Officers abutting. The Sector 9 of the Bhilai Steel Plant was hardly at a distance of 1 1/2 miles. The land lay in between the two roads, Uttai-Durg and Durg-Boarsi. The claimants relied upon certain sale-deeds relating to plots in close vicinity of the abadi, sold in 1958 and 1959. which indicated that the price was almost Re. 1/- per square foot there. The learned Judge proceeded on that basis to hold that for the Land 250 yards away from the built-up area, the price should be 50 Nps. per square foot and should further be re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et down the principles which should guide us in determining the market value: "Market value on the basis of which compensation is payable under Section 23 of the Act means the price that a willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller for a property having due regard to its existing condition, with all its existing advantages, and its potential possibilities when laid out in its most advantageous manner, excluding any advantages due to the carrying out of the scheme for the purposes for which the property is compulsorily acquired." Raghubans Narain v. The Uttar Pradesh Government. AIR 1967 SC 465. (ii) "The value of the potentialities must be ascertained on such materials as are available, without indulging in beats of imagination....." The land is not to be valued merely by reference to the use to which it is being put at the time at which its value has to be determined, but also by reference to the uses to which it is reasonably capable of being put in the near future. ............ The land must not be valued as though it had already been built upon. ............ It is the possibilities of the land and not its realised possibilities that must be taken i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e acquired land, (c) should have similar amenities and advantages and (d) these should be transactions of time reasonably proximus to the date of the acquisition." We may observe at the outset that the determination of the market value by the Land Acquisition Officer on the basis of a multiple which was worked out on no rational basis and where the consideration of each transaction taken into account, was not sought to be proved by the evidence of the persons who were either parties to the transaction or who had personal knowledge about it, and, therefore, the foundation having been laid on inadmissible evidence, could not be acceptable to us. . The Additional (contd. on col. 2) District Judge's award was equally arbitrary. We could not find any comparable sale which gave to the vendor the price at the rate of ₹ 12,000/- or ₹ 7,000/-an acre, for any land in close proximity, at or about the time of the notification. We also could see no justifiable reason for drawing a line which could put the very contiguous land on the other side, at a discount of ₹ 5,000/- an acre. Instead of keeping a sliding scale as one went deeper to the east, the Additional Distri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the abadi; a very significant admission on his part that there was habitation all around when he purchased the plot. Similar is the statement of Dudharam (A.W. 4) Sadik Ali (A.W. 8) who proves Ex. P-6, Badal Prasad (A. W, 9) who proves Ex. P-7, Devi Prasad Gupta (A.W. 15) who proves Ex. P-10, Sundarlal (A.W. 17) who proves Ex. P-11 and Savantram (A.W. 20) who proves Ex. P-12. all of them admit that the plots they purchased were within the Kasaridih abadi. Houses were all around, A glance at the map Ex. P-14 makes it Abundantly clear that on one side of the road is the Kasaridih abadi and on the other side are the plots these witnesses had purchased. It appears that some houses had come up on this side of the road when the witnesses purchased the plots and the area where they wanted to settle was not lonesome It was in fact contiguous to the abadi providing to the plot-holders all the amenities of the village life. The lands which the Government has acquired are paddy fields with embankments 4' high, unapprochable during rains, except by wading through water or by going over the embankments. It is difficult to conceive of a purchaser who would build a house in a field like th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer-in-charge had colluded with the claimants? Why could he not summon independent witnesses; those unconcerned with the acquisition, who might have purchased or sold lands in the vicinity? Not that such persons or such transactions were not available. The Land Acquisition Officer in his award dated the 4th August. 1969. had referred, in para 5, to numerous comparable transactions which could be proved over again before the Additional District Judge. That was not done. The question was whether we could read the admissions of a counsel relating to those transactions; made before the Land Acquisition Officer as evidence in the proceedings before this Court. The question was not free from difficulty. The Land Acquisition Officer was supposed to act as an agent of the Government for the purposes of acquisition. The enquiry before him was supposed to be departmental in its character for the purpose of enabling him to make a tender to the person parting with land. He was, therefore, not a judicial officer nor were proceedings before him judicial in the true sense. Yet he had been conferred powers of a Civil Court under Section 14 of the Land Acquisition Act for the purposes of summon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uments. If the High Court wanted to take into consideration any fresh evidence, it should have admitted the game in accordance with law. In that event the appellants would have got opportunity to rebut that evidence. That having not been done we do not think it was open to the High Court to rely on those documents. We accordingly exclude from consideration those documents." Realizing that the sale-deeds proved before the Land Acquisition Officer should have been placed before the Court as evidence to be read in the case, the learned Government Advocate made an application under Order 41. Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for admitting additional evidence, and at the same time gave notice to the counsel appearing for the claimants to admit or deny the documents proposed to be tendered. There could be no serious objection to the admittance of the documents because they were referred by the Land Acquisition Officer in his award and they furnished the reasoning in support of his conclusions. Shri Wasudeo Patankar. Advocate appearing for Manglabai Kaley, had admitted before the Land Acquisition Officer that the transactions under which his client had purchased the lands were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld invite attention of the parties to the decision we gave in that appeal and use it as a comparable award. In fact, (contd. on column 2) the claimants themselves exhibited the Judgment delivered in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 21 of 1966 (Ex. P-13) and asked for a comparable award. Our admitting the additional evidence, in a wav is not going to prejudice the claimants. In fact, the claimants having failed to discharge the onus of proving the market value we could accept the award of the Land Acquisition Officer, but finding that we could make a better award on the basis of the very documents placed before him. we could not have declined to look into them. The following sale-deeds have been received as additional evidence. (We have considered only such sale-deeds as have been admitted by the Counsel appearing for the claimants and about which there could possibly be no controversy) Price (i) Sale-deed dated 14-2-1959 by Puniyabai in favour of Smt. Manglabai Kaley Khasra No. 946/6 Area: 59 Acres. 2000/- (ii) Sale-deed dated 14-2-1959 by Biselal in favour of Smt. Manglabai Kaley. Khasra No. 960/1 Area : 1 Acre. 4000/- (iii) Sale deed dated 15-1-1959 executed by Kher ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce in the present case is just the same rather a bit inferior. "It is an admitted position that the acquired land lies in between Durg-Uttai road to the North and Kasaridih road to the South (Please see the map Ex. A-1). To the North of the Durg-Uttai road are bungalows of the District Officers as shown in the map. then the paultry farm and then the open playground or land kept reserved for the Central Jail. Thereafter lie paddy fields. To the South of the road are Kaleys' bungalow, their automobile workshop and all some distance Sims Bakery (Map Ex. A-8 may be seen). In between and to the South are paddy fields. The land has been acquired for extension of the abadi. The area is within municipal limits. Possibility of increased house-building activity in that direction is not too remote. The Bhilai Sector 9 is at a distance of 1 1/2 miles. The land on the road side may be wanted for ancillary industries. Two houses have been recently constructed on Kaleys' plots." Our pertinent query to the claimants was. how could Kaleys. Mangalu Sao and Modis acquire lands from the cultivators in 1958 and in February 1959 at ₹ 5000/- an acre, when everything they spoke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le-deeds in favour of Kaleys (referred to in para 16) which relate to the lands placed in better situation, were acquired in the years 1958 and 1959 at a price range between ₹ 4000/- to ₹ 5000/- an acre with all the potential value the land possessed on account of the Government bungalows, the Jail Compound, the Poultry farm. Kaleys' bungalow and their garage and the Sim's Bakery. There was no spurt in the building activity after Kaleys acquired the land. Rather the pace of progress in that direction was negligible. Yet we allowed a nominal 10% increase towards potential value. Referring to the evidence in the present case. Sadik Ali (A. W. 8) says that he had purchased in or about the years 1965-66 four acres of agricultural lands in Kasaridih village, at a price less than ₹ 4000/- an acre. He gives the price of agricultural land to be anything between Ra 2000/- to ₹ 4000/-. Jethu (N. A. W. 2) had purchased Khasra No. 705/3 area .78 acres for ₹ 546/- on 5-1-1959. Kheduram (N.A.W. 5) had purchased one acre from Banta on 5-7-1958 for ₹ 1500/-. Though he says that he paid later on ₹ 5000/- and obtained no receipt, we hardly believe h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
