IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.6202 OF 2001

K. Sharadarani Srinivas                    ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Special Land Acquisition Officer & Anr.   ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The appellant’s land situated within the area of Bagalkot Municipality was  acquired in the year 1991.  For this purpose, Notification under Section 4(1) of the  

Land Acquisition Act,  1894 [for  short  “the Act”]  was issued on 4.9.1991.   By an  award dated 15.2.1995, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the  

land at Rs.175 per sq. meter.  On an application made by the appellant, the Collector  made a  reference  under  Section 18  of  the  Act.   Before  the  Reference  Court,  the  

appellant filed three sale deeds dated 1.4.1952, 9.1.1957 and 19.10.1977 which were  marked as Exhibits P.2, P.3 and P.4 respectively.  The Reference Court relied upon  

Exhibit P.4 vide which 300 sq. feet land was sold for a sum of Rs.10,702/- (Rs.384 per  sq. meter) and enhanced the compensation from Rs.175 per sq. meter to Rs.700 per  

sq. meter by giving ten per cent increase per annum. ....2/-

- 2 -

On an appeal filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section  54(1) of the Act, the High Court modified the award of the Reference Court and  

reduced the compensation from Rs.700 per sq. meter to Rs.380 per sq. meter.  Hence,  this appeal by special leave.   

Learned counsel  for  the appellant  relied  upon the  judgment  in  Special  Land Acquisition Officer, BTDA, Bagalkot vs. Mohd. Hanif Sahib Bawa Sahib – 2002  

(3)  SCC  688  to  show  that  in  respect  of  the  land  acquired  for  new  township  of  Bagalkot, increase of ten per cent per annum has been approved by this Court and  

submitted that in view of that judgment, award passed by the Reference Court may  be  restored.   Learned  counsel  for  the  respondents  submitted  that  compensation  

awarded for  the  land which was subject  matter  of  the  case  cited  by  the  learned  counsel was at the rate of only Rs.8 per sq. feet and, therefore, the principle laid down  

therein cannot be made basis for upsetting the impugned judgment. We have carefully gone through the judgment in Special Land Acquisition  

Officer, BTDA, Bagalkot vs. Mohd. Hanif Sahib Bawa Sahib and are of the view that  the issue raised in the present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment  

because this Court categorically upheld the increase of ten per cent per annum with  reference to the sale deed of an earlier year.   

Accordingly, the civil appeal is allowed, impugned order rendered by the  High Court is set aside and the same passed by the Reference Court is restored.

No costs.  

......................J.               [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.               [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, July 14, 2009.