GOVERNMENT OF BOMBAY Vs. KARIM TAR MAHOMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference from the Collector of Bombay, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, to determine the amount of compensation to be awarded to Karim Tar Mahomed for certain land on Mazagon Road, which has been notified for acquisition by Government on behalf of the Municipality of Bombay on the 17 November 1904. The land is shown in pink on the plan Ex. A. It measures 3475 square yards with a frontage of 165 feet on Mazagon Road and 148 feet on Valpakhadi Road and a mean depth of 170 feet on the Mazagon Road. At the date of the notice there was a bungalow and out-houses on the land but it is admitted that the land should be valued as vacant building land. The Collector has offered Rs. 15 a square yard and the claimant considering his land to be worth Rs. 25, applied to the Collector for a reference to this Court.

(2.) The valuation cannot be based on what the property was producing at the time of the notice, nor have there been any recent sales of the land to guide the Court.

(3.) The market value must, therefore, be determined by sales of similar land in the neighbourhood. From Ex. A and other evidence that has been given it is clear that small holdings are the rule in the locality. The owner in claiming compensation can seek to prove either what the property would fetch if sold in one block, or what is the present value if he plotted out the (property and sold it in lots. He has not attempted the latter course. I have therefore to decide what was the market value of this plot of land as a whole on or about the 17 November 1904. No evidence has been adduced of sales in the neighbourhood of such a large block of land, but the evidence before the Court of sales of small pieces of land in the neighbourhood can enable the Court to give an opinion regarding the values of different portions of the block and the value of the whole must be deduced from these. In addition to the evidence of sales the Court can be guided by the opinions of surveyors. It is necessary however to distinguish opinion from argument. And the practice which has grown up in References under the Land Acquisition Act of surveyors making long reports and providing copies to the opposite side before the hearing appears to me open to grave objection. A surveyor's opinion by itself is good evidence. What value the Court will put on it depends entirely on the effect of the cross-examination but there is no reason why the witness should himself provide the material for his cross-examination. It will save the time of the Court if a surveyor prepares a concise description of the property to be valued, but if he is a wise man he will add nothing more except his opinion of its value. If however he does give his reasons they must be based on facts and not on hypothesis.