9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion by seeking a reference under s. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The sub-court enhanced the compensation by Rs. 26,898. This enhanced compensation was received by the assessee's family partly in July, 1974, and partly in September, 1974. Not satisfied with the enhanced compensation given by the Sub-court, Chengalpattu, the assessee went up in appeal to the High Court. The High Court, by its judgment dated April 8, 1974, awarded further compensation of Rs. 3,93,338 in addition to the compensation awarded by the sub-court. Aggrieved by the award made by the High Court, the State Government has filed an appeal before the Supreme Court questioning the enhancement of compensation by the High Court, and the said appeal is pending disposal before the Supreme Court. Pending the appeal, the Government had deposited the entire enhanced compensation awarded by the High Court and the assessee had been permitted by the Supreme Court to withdraw the extra compensation amount on furnishing a bank guarantee and the assessee drew the amount and had deposited the same in the Indian Bank in fixed deposit on April 15, 1975. For the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72, the WTO had earlier taken th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee had only a right to claim enhanced compensation and such a right is inchoate and it is only right to sue and such a right has no market value at all. According to the assessee, even though the sub-court as well as the High Court had awarded excess compensation amount, that should be ignored and cannot be added to the sum of Rs. 2,53,939 which was originally fixed as compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer. On behalf of the Revenue, it was contended before the Tribunal that there are no two rights, one, to receive compensation and the other, a separate right to receive extra or excess compensation, that the right to receive compensation accrued to the owner of the lands as soon as the lands were acquired by the Government, that the decisions of the civil courts enhancing the compensation should be taken to be a fixation of compensation payable for the lands acquired on the date of the acquisition, that those decisions will relate back to the date of the acquisition and that, therefore, the excess compensation awarded by the civil courts should be added on to the original compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer for the purpose of evaluating the right ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into account for amending the estimated value of the right to receive the compensation made earlier. But, the reasoning of the Supreme Court is not on the ground that the right to receive additional compensation is an additional right available to the assessee, which had no value, but on a different ground. The reasoning of the Supreme Court is as follows (headnote): "The lands which are compulsorily acquired by the Government during the lifetime of the deceased cannot form part of his estate but the right to receive compensation therefor at market value on the date of the notification for acquisition which would accrue to the deceased would be property that would pass on the death of the deceased. Where lands are compulsorily acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, there are no two rights, one, a right to receive compensation and the other, a right to receive extra or further compensation.. The claimant has only one right which is to receive compensation for the lands at their market value on the date of the relevant notification under section 4(1) and it is this right which is quantified by the Collector under section 11 and by the civil court under section 26 of the Land Acqui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o receive additional or excess compensation and that it is for the authorities to value, once and for all, the right to get compensation taking note of all the relevant factors. But, the valuation of the right to receive compensation cannot be below the Amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer; for the compensation to be paid ultimately cannot be below the offer made by the Collector. The view taken by the Tribunal is not in accord with the view taken by the Supreme Court in the above case. The view taken by the Tribunal that when a land is acquired, the owner of the land has got two rights, one, a right to receive compensation and the other, a right to receive additional or excess compensation, is not legally tenable, having regard to the above decision of the Supreme Court. The Tribunal has then proceeded to value the right to receive the additional compensation treating it as a separate right and held that it has no value at all and, therefore, no amount could be added as additional compensation for the lands for the purpose of determining the net wealth of the assessee in this case. In this case, originally, the right to receive compensation was taken as the amount of com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis for determining the market value of the lands acquired as on the relevant date. Learned counsel for the assessee would, however, submit that since the Tribunal has made such an evaluation and has found that the right to get additional compensation is of nil value, no addition could be made by the WTO on that account and since that finding of the Tribunal has not been challenged by seeking a reference on that specific question, it is not possible for this court to interfere with that portion of the order of the Tribunal. As already stated in this case, the Tribunal has proceeded on an erroneous basis that there are two rights available to the assessee, one a right to get compensation and the other a right to get additional compensation and so long as the right to get additional compensation has no value, no amount could be added on that account, even though the compensation is enhanced by the civil courts. Thus, the basis on which the Tribunal has proceeded is found to be erroneous in view of the decision of the Supreme Court. The Tribunal proceeds on the basis that there is an additional right to get enhanced compensation and no amount should be added as the value of the rig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
