Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | 1894: ' Determination of compensation - Basic principle before placing reliance on the previous award/judgment or comparable sales Land Acquisition Act |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Order |
Jurisdiction | India |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Disposed Off |
Headnote | Determination of compensation - Basic principle before placing reliance on the previous award/judgment or comparable sales - High Court relied upon a judgment in which for the _acquisition of lana in the year 1999, exemplar of 1997 was relied upon - Held: The High Court passed the judgment in a blind manner - It was incumbent upon the High Court to take into consideration various transactions that were on record, entered into before the date of issuance of Notification under s.4 of the Act - High Court could not have placed an outright reliance on the decision of Swaran · Singh's case, without considering the nature of transaction relied upon in the said decision - The land in Swaran Singh's case was situated just across the road as observed by the High Court as such it was relevant evidence but not binding - As such it could have ·been. taken into consideration due lo the nearness of the area, but at the same time what was the nature of the transaction relied upon in the said case was also required to be looked into in an objective manner - Such decisions in other cases cannot be relied upon without examining the basis for determining compensation as to whether sale transaction referred to therein can be relied upon or not and what was the distance, size and also bonajide nature of transaction before such judgments/awards are relied on for deciding the subsequent cases - High Court granted 15% cumulative increase which was not justified - Even accepting some increase annually due to development made after previous acquisition but that could not have been granted on cumulative basis but on a flat basis, that too considering subsequent' rate offered for nearby areas - Therefore, adding between 12-13% flat increase, taking base price at Ks.1560/- granted in the case of Swaran Singh, the price would come approximately to Rs.1.10 crores per acre - Further deduction in addition to deduction made in Swaran Singh s case is required to be made towards development - it is held appropriate to deduct further amount of Rs.15 lakhs - Thus, the compensation came toRs.95 lakhs per acre, and not Rs.1,46,09,000/- as determined by High Court - Thus, it is deemed appropriate to award Rs.95 lakh per acre along with statutory benefits.Comparable sales - Award of compensation - Determining Factors - The compensation cannot be determined by blindly following the previous award/judgment - it has to be considered only a piece of evidence not beyond that - Court has to apply the judicial mind and is not to follow the previous awards without due consideration of the facts and circumstances and evidence adduced in the case in question - The current value reflected by comparable sale deeds is more reliable and binding for determination of compensation - In such cases award/judgment relating to an acquisition made before 5 to 10 years cannot form the safe basis for determining compensation Comparable sales - Binding effect - Held: The award and judgment in the case of others not being inter parties are not binding precedents - Recently, it is noticed that courts follow them blindly probably under the misconception of the concept of equality and fair treatment - The courts are being swayed away and this approaching the absence of and similar nature and situation of land is causing more injustice and tantamount to giving equal treatment in the case of unequals.Comparable sales - Evidentiary value vis-a-vis presidential value - The previous awards/judgments are the only piece of evidence at par with comparative sale transactions - The similarity of the land covered by previous judgment/award is required to be proved like any other comparative exemplar - In case previous award/judgment is based on exemplar, which is not similar or acceptable, previous award/judgment of court cannot be said to be binding - Such determination has to be outrightly rejected - In Case some mistake has been done in awarding compensation, it cannot be followed on the ground of parity as an illegality cannot be perpetuated - Such award/judgment would be wholly irrelevant Comparable sales -Acquisition made 10 to 12 years ago - Held: Reliance of such acquisition is made only when there is absence of sale transaction before issuance of notification unders.4 of the Act and for giving annual increase, evidence should reflect that price of land had appreciated regularly and did not remain static - The Recent trend for last several years indicates that price of land is more or less static if it has not gone down - At present,there is no appreciation of value - Thus, it is not a very safe method of determining compensation.Award of compensation - Previous award/ judgment - Mistake Or illegality in the previous award - In case some gross mistake or illegality has been committed in previous award/judgment of not making deduction etc. and/or sufficient evidence had not been abducted and better evidence is adduced in case at hand, previous award/judgment being not inter-parties cannot be followed and ifland is not similar in nature in all aspects it has to be outrightly rejected as done in the case of comparative exemplars - Precedent. Precedent - To rely upon judgment/award in case .it does not form part of evidence recorded by reference court, an application under Or.41 r.27 is to be filed to adduce evidence and if it is allowed opposite party has to be given opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal - The award/judgment cannot be taken into consideration while hearing arguments unless they form part of evidence in the case - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Or. 41 r. 2 7.Precedent - Binding effect of - The dismissal of the special leave petition without assigning of reason cannot be treated as a·binding precedent of Supreme Court. |
Judge | N/A |
Neutral Citation | 2017 INSC 1297 |
Petitioner | Manoj Kumar Etc. Etc. |
Respondent | State Of Haryana And Others Etc. Etc. |
SCR | [2017] 8 S.C.R. 997 |
Judgement Date | 2017-09-13 |
Case Number | 13132-13141 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
Sl. | Authority | Responsibilities | Communication Details |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education |
Sanctioning Authority | https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives |
2 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project | https://www.iitkgp.ac.in |
3 | National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project | Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in |
4 | Project PI / Joint PI | Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project |
Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon |
5 | Website/Portal (Helpdesk) | Queries regarding NDLI and its services | support@ndl.gov.in |
6 | Contents and Copyright Issues | Queries related to content curation and copyright issues | content@ndl.gov.in |
7 | National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club) | Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach | clubsupport@ndl.gov.in |
8 | Digital Preservation Centre (DPC) | Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books | dpc@ndl.gov.in |
9 | IDR Setup or Support | Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops | idr@ndl.gov.in |