IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5269 OF 2008
(Arising out of SLP [C] No.6169 of 2006)
Jivanbhai Ambalal & Ors. ... Appellants
Vs.
Special L.A.Q. Officer & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
CA No. 5270 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (C) No.7293/2006)
CA No. 5271 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (C) No.7863/2006)
ORDER
CA No. 5269 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (C) No.6169/2006)
Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The matter relates to determination of compensation for acquisition of
land at Dantali Village near Gandhinagar in Gujarat under preliminary
notification dated 22.6.1989 for construction of Narmada Canal. The
Special LAO awarded Rs.4.50 per sq.m. The Reference Court awarded
Rs.62.50 per sq.m by judgment and award dated 14.3.2002. The appeal by
2
the appellants claiming enhancement of compensation to Rs.71/- per sq.m
was dismissed by the High Court by judgment dated 21.9.2005. Feeling
aggrieved, the land-owners are in appeal.
3. For determining the market value, the Reference Court relied on its
own judgment and award dated 3.12.1999 in regard to acquisition of similar
lands for the same purpose in the same village under previous Notification
dated 2.1.1986, which had attained finality. In that case, the collector had
awarded Rs.2.50 per sq.m and the Reference Court increased it by Rs.52 per
sq.m thus awarding Rs.54.50 per sq.m. In this case, the Reference Court
held that the market value for the land acquired in 1989, should be
determined with reference to the market value determined with reference to
the acquisition of 2.1.1986, by increasing the value by 10% per year.
However, the Reference Court made a mistake in assuming that the amount
awarded in respect of the acquisition in 1986 was Rs.52/- per sq.m instead
of Rs.54.50 per sq.m. It also wrongly calculated the increase for only two
years, though the gap was more than three years. The reference court thus
calculated the market value as Rs.62.50 per sq.m by taking the base rate as
Rs.52 and adding Rs.10.50 towards 20% escalation. The High Court held
that as there was no evidence to show that there was an annual increase in
3
market value by 10%, there was no need to interfere with the determination
of market value. It however modified the award of the reference court, in
regard to interest.
4. This Court, in General Manager, ONGC vs. Rameshbhai Jivanbhai
Patel (Civil Appeal No.5192 of 2002 decided on 31.7.2008) has accepted
that generally there is an annual increase of 10% to 15% in the market value
of lands in urban and semi-urban areas and 5% to 7.5% in the market value
of lands in rural areas. In this case, as the acquired land as per evidence was
hardly at a distance of 7 km from Karol, and 8 km from Gandhinagar and
about 1 km from a residential township, it has to be treated as semi-urban
area. If the market value is to be calculated in accordance with principles in
Rameshbhai Jivanbhai Patel (Supra) by applying a cumulative rate of 10%
per annum for three years over the market value of Rs.54.50 in 1986, the
market value will be Rs.72.60 per sq.m. However, as the appellants have
restricted their claim to Rs.71/- per sq.m before the High Court, we increase
the compensation from Rs.62.50 per sq.m to Rs.71 per sq.m.
5. The appeal is thus partly allowed and the compensation is increased
from Rs.62.50 to Rs.71 per sq.m. The award of the Reference Court as
4
modified by the High Court in regard to solatium, additional amount,
interest etc., will apply. Parties to bear respective costs.
CA No. 5270 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (C) No.7293/2006)
Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. In this appeal, the facts are similar to the first matter except that the
acquisition was under preliminary notification dated 6.8.1988/24.5.1988.
The Reference Court had awarded Rs.58.50 by its judgment dated
31.12.2001. The High Court refused to increase the compensation to Rs.66
per sq.m as claimed by the appellants.
3. For the reasons stated in the order in the first matter, this appeal is
also allowed and the rate of compensation is increased from Rs.58.50 to
Rs.66 per sq.m (by increasing the 1986 market value of Rs.54.50 by a
cumulative rate of 10% per year for two years). The award of the Reference
Court as modified by High Court in regard to solatium, additional amount,
interest etc., will apply. Parties to bear respective costs.
CA No. 5271 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (C) No.7863/2006)
Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5
2. In this appeal also, the facts are similar to the first matter except the
date of preliminary notification which is 7.4.1988. The Reference Court has
awarded Rs.58.50 by its judgment dated 31.12.2001. The High Court
refused to increase the compensation to Rs.66 per sq.m as claimed by
appellants.
3. For the reasons stated in the order in the first matter, this appeal is
also allowed and the rate of compensation is increased from Rs.58.50 to
Rs.66 per sq.m (by increasing the 1986 market value of Rs.54.50 by a
cumulative rate of 10% per year for two years). The award of the Reference
Court as modified by High Court in regard to solatium, additional amount,
interest etc., will apply. Parties to bear respective costs.
………………………………J
[R. V. Raveendran]
………………………………J
[Lokeshwar Singh Panta]
New Delhi;
August 26, 2008.