28 August 1996
Supreme Court
Download

SRI SAUNU Vs COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION

Bench: RAMASWAMY,K.
Case number: Appeal (civil) 3030 of 1990


1

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

PETITIONER: SRI SAUNU

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       28/08/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. VENKATASWAMI K. (J)

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Notification  under   Section  J   (1)  of   the   Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894) [for short, the "A-t"] was published on  December 4,  1965 acquiring 221 bighas of Land for the construction of approach channel to the Inlet Portal of S.S.  Tunnel by  the beas-Sutlej  Link Project.  The land Acquisition Officer  in his  award dated  June  26;27,  1968 classified the  lands into  9 items  [mentioned at page 4 of the Paper Book] and granted compensation at the rate varying between Rs.2,000/-  to Rs.5,000/-  per bigha.  On reference, the Additional  District Judge  confirmed the  award of  the Collector.  On   appeal,  in  the  impugned  judgment  dated December 31,  1982,  the  Division  Bench  in  RFA  No.19/70 confirmed the same Thus, this appeal by special leave.      Admittedly, the  appellant’s claim  is for compensation at the  rate of Rs.15,000/- per bisha. The classification of the land  and the  amount awarded  by  the  Collector  would indicate that  in respect  of Kohli I, Begicha and Abadi Deh lands, he granted 2,000/- per bigha; in respect of the lands B-1, he  granted what  was asked  for, namely  Rs.1500/- per bigha. For  Konli- II  he granted  Rs.1250/- per  bigha; for item 5  B-II, he granted Rs.1000/- per bigha; for banjar and uncultivated lands, he granted Rs.500/- per bigha. It is one of the  rarest cases  where the Land Acquisition Officer has granted fair  compensation. The  question, however,  arises: whether it  is a case For further enhancement? The appellant relied upon  five sales  instances of a small extent of land ranging between  6 biswas  and 18  biswas spoken  to by  the witnesses as  discussed by  the High  Court. These lands are situated in  the Abadi,  namely, village itself. Under those circumstances, those  sale deeds  do not form any reasonable basis to  determine higher  compensation for the vast extent of 221  bighas of  land. The test that the Court is required to adopt  is whether a willing prudent purchaser in the open market would  be prepared  to offer compensation at the rate which the  Court  proposes  to  determine  in  a  compulsory acquisition. In  this case,  the  courts  have  adopted  the

2

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

correct standard  and were  not  inclined  to  come  to  the conclusion that  the lands  would fetch higher than what was determined by  the Land  Acquisition  Officer.  Under  these circumstances, the courts below have nov committed any error of  principle   of  law  in  determining  the  compensation, warranting interference.      The  appeal   is  accordingly  dismissed  but,  in  the circumstances, without costs.