Sanjay Batham v. Munna Lal Parihar (2010) 11 SCC 665; Bhag Singh v. Union Territory & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Tlrerefore, these appeals are disposed off fixing the land value
Provisions considered
Judgment
Judgment
(2016) l S.C.R. 1084 ASHOK KUMAR & ANR. ETC. v. STATE OF HARYANA (Civil Appeal Nos. 2714-2721 OF2012) FEBRUARY 18, 2016 [KURIAN JOSEPH AND ROHINTON FALi NARIMAN, J.J.] Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - s.25 (as amended) - Amount of compensation awarded by the Court - Held: There is no restriction that compensation should be awarded only upto amount claimed by the applicant - ( 'ourt is to award just and fair compensation taking into consideration the true market value and other relevant factors, irrespective of the claim made by the owner - On facts, the properties of 1he appellant do not abut the national highway but there is only a narrow road connecting the properties of the appellants to the national highwav -- It would not be just and proper to award land i·a1ue of Rs.2501- per square yard. which is granted to the property in adjoining ril/age - Compensation of Rs.
2001- per square yard would _be just a!ld fair. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: The pre-amended provision of s. 25 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 put a cap on the maximum; the compensation by court should not be beyond the amount claimed. The amendment in 1984, on the contrary, put a cap on the minimum; compensation cannot be less that what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. The cap on maximum having been expressly omitted, and the cap that is put is only on minimum, it is clear that the amount of compensation that a court can award is no longer restricted to the amount claimed by the applicant. It is the duty of the Courtto award just and fair compensation taking into consideratio11 the true market value and other relevant factors, irrespective of the claim made by the owner.
In the instant case, the properties of the appellant do not abut the national highway. It is situated about 375 yards away from the national highway and it appears that there is only a narrow road connecting the properties of the appellants to the national highway. Therefore, 1084 A B c D E F G fl ASHOK KUMAR & ANR. ETC. v. STATE OF HARYANA 1085 it would not be just and proper to award land value of Rs.250/ per square yard, which is granted to the property in adjoining village. Having regard to the factual and legal position the just and fair compensation in the case of appellants would be Rs. 200/ - per square yard. [Paras 7, 12][1087~D-E; 1089-E-F]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Tlrerefore, these appeals are disposed off fixing the land value
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — ss. 4, 25; Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.