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

PETITIONER: THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: RAMA RANA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       13/12/1996

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Delay condoned. Leave granted.      We have  heard learned  counsel on  both  sides.  These appeals by  special leave  arise from  the judgment  of  the Gujarat High  Court, made on September 22, 1995 in F.A. Nos. 2532-2549/95.      A total extent of 68 hectares 62.5 sq. mts. of land was acquired  for   irrigation  scheme  by  publication  of  the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1  of 1894)  (for short,  the Act) on August 25, 1977. The Land  Acquisition Officer  in his  award dated March 27, 1978 awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.2023.50 per acre for the dry crop lands, Rs. 3035.25 for the irrigated lands, Rs.40.47 for  the waste lands. On reference under Section 18 of the  Act, the  Asstt. District  Judge by  his  award  and decree dated September 13, 1993 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 325/-  per acre  to all  the lands  irrespective of  the classification. On  appeal, the  High Court  in the impugned judgment confirmed  the same.  Thus these appeals by special lave.      The reference  Curt proceeded on the premise that there are  no  sale  deeds  exhibited  for  determination  of  the compensation. Therefore,  the oral  evidence was relied upon to determine  the compensation  on the basis of the yield. 8 witnesses came  to be  examined in proof of the yield of the acquired lands. One of the witnesses was the Sarpanch of the village and  his evidence  was accepted. The reference Court also found that the witnesses exaggerated the yield. On that basis, it  determined the  market value  after deducting 1/3 towards prices  at Rs.  325/- per  acre. It  would be common knowledge that  expenditure would be involved in raising and harvesting the  crops and that, therefore, on an average 50% of  the   value  of  the  crop  realised  would  go  towards cultivation expenses.  Therefore, deduction of 1/3rd was not correct in  determining the compensation of the lands on the basis of yield.      It is  undoubtedly true  that one  of  the  methods  of determination  of  compensation,  in  the  absence  of  best evidence, namely,  sale deeds,  is the realised value of the crop. Normally,  they should  have produced  the  statistics

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

from the  Agriculture Department  as to  the nature  of  the crops  and   the  prices   prevailing  at   that  time.  But unfortunately, neither claimants nor the Government took any steps to  adduce that  best evidence.  It is a fact that the Government have  failed  to  adduce  any  evidence  in  that behalf. However,  we cannot  reject the oral evidence of the witnesses on that ground alone. The court has statutory duty to the  society  to  subject  the  oral  evidence  to  great scrutiny, applying  the test  of normal  prudent man,  i.e., whether he  would be  willing to  purchase the  land at  the rates proposed by the Court. On the touch stone of this, the Court  should   evaluate  the   evidence   objectively   and dispassionately and  reach a  finding on  compensation.  The reference Court has accepted the evidence of the Sarpanch to be the  reliable  person.  Therefore,  we  proceed  on  that premise. The appropriate multiplier should be of 10 years as settled by several judgments of this Court. Necessarily, 50% of the net value towards cultivation expenses requires to be deducted. The  award of  the reference Court as confirmed by the High court stands set aside and the value of the crop as determined by  the reference  Court at Rs.2,050/- as average annual income  stands upheld.  Multiplier of 10 years should be applied and deduction of 50% towards cultivation expenses should be  made. After giving deduction, the balance will be the net  value of  the land. On the basis, the claimants are entitled to  Rs. 20,500/-  per acre  with solatium  @ 30% on enhanced compensation  and interest on enhanced compensation @ 0.9%  per annum  for one  year from  the  date  of  taking possession and  15% per  annum till date of deposit into the court under the Act as amended by Act 68 of 1984, namely 30% solatium on  the  enhanced  compensation,  interest  on  the enhanced compensation from the date of taking possession for one year at 9% and thereafter at 15% till date of deposit.      The appeals are accordingly allowed. No costs.