http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: GURLINGAPPA & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LANDACQUISITION OFFICER, GULBARG

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       28/01/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD, G.B. PATTANAIK

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Delay condoned.      Notification under  Section under  Section 4(1)  of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published in October 1977 for construction  of  Amerja  Project.  The  land    Acquisition officer in hes award under Section 11 awarded compensation @ Rs. 3,000/-  per acre.  On  reference,  the  District  Court enhanced the  compensation to  Rs.6,300/- per  acre for  dry lands and  Rs. 9,820/- per acre for Bgayat Lands (cultivable lands). On  Appeal, the  High Court  dismissed the  same and confirmed the  award of  the reference  Court. Thus  ,  this special leave petition.      It is  contended for  the petitioners  that in  similar circumstances, the  Additional Civil  Judge has enhanced the compensation to  Rs.12,000/- per acre for the irrigated land and Rs.8,000/-  per acre  for the dry lands and confirmed by the   judgment of the High Court in RFA Nos.1160 and 1825/92 and, therefore,  the petitioners  also are  entitled to  the same compensation. We find no force in the contention. It is now Well  settled legal  position that  in compulsory  of  a willing purchaser  and would  ask whether  as  a  reasonable prudent vendee,  he would  offer in the open market the rate of market value proposed by him in respect of the land under acquisition. The  Court requires  to consider  the  relative values of the lands in the neighbourhood, the soil condition and same  or similar  advantageous  features  on  comparable prices, The High Court has pointed out in its judgement that there is  no evidence  to show that the lands referred to in those  judgements  bear  any  similarity  to  the  lands  in question. on  the other hand, it is pointed out that for the same project  and for the lands situated in the same village another award  for a sum of Rs.6,320/-per acre was passed by the Additional  Civil Judge  and the same has been upheld by the High Court.      Under  these   circumstances,  we   do  not   find  any Illegality  in   the  determination   of  the   compensation warranting interference.      The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2