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

PETITIONER: INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SMT. SATYABHAMA BAI & ORS. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       05/08/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCALE  (6)38

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH        CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4847-48 AND 4849-50 OF 1995                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894  was published on January 12, 1979. The possession of the land was taken on August 25, 1980 dispensing with the enquiry under  Section 5-A  by exercise  of the  power under Section  17(4).   The  Land   Acquisition  Officer   granted compensation in  his award  under Section 11 on May 26, 1980 Rs.44,000/- per  hectare. On  reference, the  civil Court by its award  dated March 28, 1990 enhanced the compensation to Rs.1.50 per  sq.ft. with  solatium and interest thereon. The claimants filed  the  appeals  and  State  filed  the  cross appeals. The  High Court  by its  judgment and  order  dated August 31,1994  relying upon  Exs.P-5 to  P-8 and  the  sale deeds marked  thereof under Section 51-A of the Act enhanced the compensation to Rs.3/- per sq.ft. Thus, these appeals by special leave.      It is  now well  settled legal  position as laid in the case of  P. Ram  Reddy &  Ors. vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Hyderabad Urban  Development  Authority,  Hyderabad  &  Ors. [(1995) 2  SCC 305]  followed by  catena of  other decisions that filing  of the  certified copies  of the sale deeds and marked thereor  under Section  51-A is  only to  enable  the claimants to  dispense with  the obligation,  to produce the original sale  deed from  the owners  who are disinclined to part with their valuable title deed during long pendency of: the proceedings. However, the claimants are enjoined to call as witnesses  the vendee or vendee to prove the transactions as genuine  in nature  and also  the extent of consideration paid and  relative nature of value of land as required under law. In  this case though the documents, Exs.P-5 to P-8 have been  marked,   none  of  the  persons  connected  with  the documents has been examined.      Under these  circumstances, the  sale deeds  cannot  be

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

relied on  to determine the compensation. The High Court and the Tribunal,  therefore, obviously committed grievous error of law  in relying  upon those  untested and  unproved  sale deeds in  determining the  compensation. The  award  or  the reference Court  and also  that of the High Court stands set aside. The  matter is  remitted to  the reference  Court for disposal in accordance with law.      All the  appeals are allowed, out, in the circumstances without costs.      Pursuant to  the interim  order passed by this Court on April 21,  1995, the respondents in C.A. SLP (C) Nos. 21466- 67/94 had  furnished the bank guarantee to the extent of the half of  the enhanced  compensation and  have withdrawn  the same. The  order would  continue  pending  disposal  of  the reference application  under  Section  18  of  the  Act  and depending upon  the award  that may  be passed,  appropriate direction  will   be  given,  by  the  reference  Court  for adjustment or recovery thereof.