Case Note & Summary
The State of Goa appealed against an award of the Additional District Judge, Panaji, which enhanced compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land, comprising Survey Nos. 309/5 and 311/6, was acquired by notification dated 16/08/1991 for realignment of the Mardol bye pass on National Highway 4A. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs. 25 and Rs. 30 per sq. metre respectively. Dissatisfied, the claimant sought reference under Section 18, claiming Rs. 250 per sq. metre. The District Judge enhanced the rates to Rs. 60 per sq. metre for Survey No. 309/5 and Rs. 79.68 per sq. metre for Survey No. 311/6, relying on a sale instance from 1986 of adjacent land at Rs. 30 per sq. metre, applying 10% annual escalation for five years, and deducting one-third for development charges. The State argued that there was no proper evidence and that escalation and deduction were erroneous. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found that the trial judge's approach was based on acceptable evidence and legal principles. The court noted that the acquired land was near a road, local market, bank, post office, and temple, indicating development potential. The comparable sale instance was of adjacent land, and the escalation at 10% per annum was standard. The deduction of one-third for development was also proper. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the enhanced compensation.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Compensation - Market Value Determination - Comparable Sale Method - The court considered whether the trial judge correctly relied on a sale instance from 1986 for land adjacent to the acquired land to determine market value as of 1991, applying 10% annual escalation and deducting one-third for development charges - Held that the method was proper and the appeal was dismissed (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Additional District Judge correctly enhanced the compensation for acquired land by relying on a comparable sale instance from 1986 and applying escalation at 10% per annum, and whether the deduction of one-third towards development charges was proper.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; compensation as awarded by Additional District Judge upheld.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 18
- Section 4
- market value determination
- comparable sale method
- escalation at 10% per annum
- deduction for development charges
- rule of average
