Case Note & Summary
The case arises from the acquisition of 23,900 square metres of land belonging to the appellant, Smt. Shrimati Vishwanath Acharya (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), situated in Peddem ward of Loliem Village, Canacona Taluka, Goa, for the construction of a new broad gauge line for the Konkan Railway. The acquisition was initiated by a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, published on 27 June 1991. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.4 per square metre for the land, along with Rs.2,67,558.49 for trees and Rs.40,915 for a water tank. Dissatisfied, the appellant sought a reference under Section 18 of the Act, claiming Rs.100 per square metre for the land and Rs.50,000 for the tank, as well as damages for injurious affection to the remaining land due to loss of irrigation facilities. The Reference Court framed two issues: market value of land and compensation for the tank, but the tank claim was given up. The appellant examined AW1 Madhav Acharya, who relied on two sale deeds: Exhibit 23 (4 July 1988) for two plots at Rs.64 per square metre, and Exhibit 24 (7 February 1990) for a plot at Rs.66 per square metre, both located in Loliem village at distances of 4 and 5 km from the acquired land. The Reference Court, however, dismissed the claim and upheld the award of Rs.4 per square metre. On appeal, the High Court of Bombay at Goa considered the comparability of the sale deeds, noting that the acquired land was agricultural but had potential for development, being near a national highway and a railway station. The court found that the sale deeds were of small plots (675+75 sq m and 1500 sq m) compared to the acquired land (23,900 sq m), but held that the principle of comparable sales could be applied with appropriate deductions for size. The court rejected the respondents' argument that the sale deeds were of developed plots, noting that the acquired land was also suitable for development. Applying a deduction of 33% for the larger size, the court arrived at a market value of Rs.44 per square metre, but considering the time gap and potential, it fixed the market value at Rs.66 per square metre as on the date of notification. The court also noted that the appellant did not press the claim for the water tank and was satisfied with the tree compensation. Regarding injurious affection, the court observed that no issue was framed and no evidence was led, so no compensation was awarded. The appeal was partly allowed, enhancing the market value to Rs.66 per square metre, with consequential benefits under Section 23(1A) (12% per annum on enhanced market value from date of notification to award) and Section 23(2) (30% solatium on enhanced market value), and interest under Section 28 (9% per annum for the first year from date of possession, thereafter 15% per annum). The respondents were directed to pay the enhanced compensation within three months.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Market Value Determination - Comparable Sale Method - Section 23(1) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The court considered two sale deeds of similar land in the same village, one at Rs.64 per sq m (1988) and another at Rs.66 per sq m (1990), and held that the acquired land, being agricultural with potential for development, should be valued at Rs.66 per sq m as on the date of notification (27/06/1991), rejecting the lower rate of Rs.4 per sq m awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and Reference Court. (Paras 3-10) B) Land Acquisition - Injurious Affection - Claim for Loss of Irrigation - Section 23(1) fourthly Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The appellant claimed damages for loss of irrigation facilities to the remaining land due to acquisition, but no issue was framed, no evidence led, and the claim was not quantified; hence, the court declined to award any compensation under this head. (Paras 4-5) C) Land Acquisition - Compensation for Trees and Water Tank - The appellant was satisfied with the compensation awarded for trees (Rs.2,67,558.49) and did not press the claim for the water tank (Rs.40,915) before the Reference Court; therefore, no enhancement was considered. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the market value of the acquired land should be enhanced from Rs.4 per square metre to Rs.100 per square metre as claimed by the appellant, and whether compensation for injurious affection to the remaining land is payable.
Final Decision
Appeal partly allowed. Market value of the acquired land is fixed at Rs.66 per square metre. The appellant is entitled to: (i) additional compensation under Section 23(1A) at 12% per annum on the enhanced market value from the date of notification (27/06/1991) to the date of award (31/03/1994); (ii) solatium under Section 23(2) at 30% on the enhanced market value; (iii) interest under Section 28 at 9% per annum for the first year from the date of possession, and thereafter at 15% per annum until payment. The respondents are directed to pay the enhanced compensation within three months. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Market value determination
- comparable sale method
- injurious affection
- Section 23 Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 4(1) Land Acquisition Act
