RAMCHANDRA MAROTRAO AVACHAT Vs. COLLECTOR NAGPUR DIST NAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are the owners of Survey No. 67 area 9. 76 acres, Survey No. 68 area 10. 37 acres, Survey No. 69 area 11. 45 acres and Survev No. 70 area 8. 16 acres situated at Mouza Chikhali, Tahsil and District Nagpur. These lands were acquired for Eastern Industrial Area Street Scheme by the Nagpur Improvement Trust. The notification regarding framing of the said scheme was published on 30-6-1962 under S. 39 of the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as "the N. I. T. Act" for the sake of brevity ). This notification under S. 39 of the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act corresponds to the notification under sub-section (1) of S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A final notification under S. 45 of the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act was also issued, which Notification corresponds to S. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(2.) THE Land Acquisition Officer adopted the land rate of Rs. 1800/- per acre for survey No. 70 and the land rate of Rs. 3000/- per acre for the remaining three fields. After adding solatium of 15% the total compensation awarded to the appellant was Rupees 1,26,250/- only. The award was accordingly passed on 31-12-1969. Since the appellants were not satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, they filed a reference under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Tribunal. They claimed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 30,000/- per acre for the field Survey Nos. 67, 68 and 69 and at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre for field Survey No. 70. The claim in respect of the well and also trees were also included in the reference. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record, awarded the compensation at the rate of RS. 11,000/-per acre. The Tribunal took into consideration the transaction of sale of land Survey Nos. 29, 42 and 43 of Mouza Pardi by the Nagpur Improvement Trust to the Ware Housing Corporation, Nagpur vide sale deed dated 15th February, 1963. The sale of land under the said sale deed was at the rate of Re. 0. 96 paise per sq. ft. The rate awarded for the land under acquisition was Re. 0. 25 paise per sq. ft. only because, according to the Tribunal, the situation of the fields was beyond the railway crossing and a Nallah also intervenes. It also considered the heavy development cost, which will be required to be incurred for developing the lands. The judgment of the Tribunal was challenged by the appellants in Writ Petition No. 2561 of 1982. The said writ petition, which was heard with Writ Petition No. 2448 of 1982, also came to be dismissed by a common judgment dated 19th June, 1987. Feeling aggrieved thereby this Letters Patent Appeal is filed by the appellant claimants.

(3.) NO fault could be found in the approach of the Tribunal for taking into consideration the sale transaction dated 15th February, 1963 in order to assess the value of' the land under acquisition. It appears that the land sold under the said sale deed was a developed piece of land, whereas the fields under acquisition are not at all developed. Considering this factor the value of the land under acquisition was reduced by 3/4 of the value of the- land under the sale deed dated 15th February, 1963. It is this reduction in value which is disputed before us. It was vehemently contended on behalf of the appellants that there wits no justification for reducing the price drastically to the extent of 3 14th of the value by way of development charges. Our attention was drawn to the observations of the Supreme Court in Tribmi Devi v. Collector, Ranch, AIR 1972 SC 1417 and Brig. Sahib Singh Kalha v. Amritsar Improvement Trust, AIR 1982 SC 940. In the former case, it is observed that In order to develop the area at least 1/3rd value of the land would have to be deducted for roads, drainage and amenities, while in the latter case it was observed that it is a well settled principle of valuation that where there is a large area of undeveloped land under acquisition, provision has to be made for providing minimum amenities of town life, such as water connection, well laid out roads, drainage, facility, electric connection etc. The process necessarily involves deduction of cost of factors required to bring undeveloped lands on par with developed lands. An extent of 20 per cent of the total land acquired is normally taken as a reasonable deduction for the space required for roads, but the cost of development may range between 20 and 33 per cent depending on the nature of the land, its situation and the stage of development etc.