- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Bakhtawar Singh And Another v. Union Of India And Another
Factual and Procedural Background
On 8 June 1979, the State Government issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire approximately 527 acres of land situated in Village Bhagu and neighbouring villages (Bibiwala, Bachu Khurd, Bachu Kalan, Gobindpura and Mehna) in District Bathinda for establishing a defence cantonment. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs 22,000 per acre for Nehri and Chahi lands, Rs 8,000 per acre for Barani land and Rs 4,000 per acre for Gair-mumkin land by an award dated 30 March 1981.
Upon reference under Section 18, the Additional District Judge on 6 August 1983 enhanced compensation for Nehri and Chahi lands to Rs 36,000 per acre and for Gair-mumkin land to Rs 6,000 per acre. A learned Single Judge of the High Court upheld that award on 3 August 1984. In letters-patent appeal, the Division Bench further enhanced the rate for Nehri land to Rs 37,000 per acre on 17 September 1985. The present appeals by special leave seek an additional enhancement above the Division Bench figure.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the appellants are entitled to compensation at the higher rate of Rs 50,000 per acre (or more) in parity with compensation awarded for lands in neighbouring villages covered by the same acquisition notification.
- Whether reliance on sale transactions from small parcels within the acquired area or on decisions in other villages provides a proper evidentiary basis for further enhancement.
Arguments of the Parties
Appellants' Arguments
- The Land Acquisition Officer awarded identical base rates for lands in Bhagu and the neighbouring villages; therefore, parity demands the same enhanced rate later fixed for Bachu Khurd, Bachu Kalan and Mehna (Rs 50,000–90,000 per acre).
- Lands in Bhagu possess similar advantages: proximity to the Bathinda urban area, only 1 km from Phoos Mandi railway station and 4 km from the Industrial Training Institute.
- The Division Bench erred by taking an average of four sale deeds to derive Rs 37,000 per acre; this Court has repeatedly held that averaging of prices is impermissible.
- A judgment of the High Court (affirmed in Union of India v. Zora Singh) fixed Rs 50,000 per acre for comparable Nehri and Chahi lands acquired under the same notification, and Bhagu landowners should receive the same amount.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Union of India v. Zora Singh, (1992) 1 SCC 673 | Upheld High Court’s fixation of Rs 50,000 per acre for Nehri and Chahi lands in neighbouring villages acquired under the same notification. | The Court noted that the SLP against that judgment was dismissed without a speaking order and held that it could not serve as a reliable benchmark for Bhagu because the underlying evidence and circumstances were not on record in the present appeals. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Supreme Court observed that:
- The claimants themselves had produced sale deeds from the very lands acquired in Bhagu, with the highest price reflecting approximately Rs 40,000 per acre for a small parcel (4 kanals 6 marlas). When the acquisition involves 527 acres in bulk, equating bulk value to such isolated, higher-priced sales would be unrealistic.
- The Division Bench relied on four sale transactions and had already awarded Rs 37,000 per acre—an amount exceeding the Rs 35,000 per acre originally claimed before the Land Acquisition Officer and closely approaching the Rs 40,000 evidenced by the highest sale.
- The principle of averaging sale prices, though criticised in other judgments, did not prejudice the appellants because the High Court effectively granted the maximum credible market value based on available evidence.
- Judgments pertaining to other villages (e.g., the Zora Singh case) were not part of the record in these appeals; without evidence of comparable location, quality and other factors, those judgments could not justify further enhancement for Bhagu.
- The State had not challenged the enhancement to Rs 37,000 per acre, signalling acceptance of that valuation.
Consequently, the Court found no evidentiary basis to disturb the Division Bench’s award.
Holding and Implications
Appeals DISMISSED; no further enhancement in compensation.
As a direct consequence, compensation for Nehri and Chahi lands in Village Bhagu remains at Rs 37,000 per acre, with no costs awarded. The decision does not set a new precedent; it is confined to the evidentiary shortcomings of the present record and leaves untouched the valuation in other villages decided separately.
Order
1. Leave granted in SLPs Nos. 13360 of 1986, 8584 of 1992, 14567, 14591-92 and 14657 of 1987, 2201, 2833, 2835, 2868, 3175, 4062 and 2136 of 1991.
2. Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) was published in the State Gazette on 8-6-1979, acquiring 527 and odd acres of land situated in Bhagu along with the lands in Villages Bibiwala, Bachu Khurd, Bachu Kalan, Gobindpura and Mehna in Batinda District to establish cantonment for the defence purposes at Bhatinda. The Land Acquisition Officer (for short ‘the LAO’) in his award dated 30-3-1981, awarded a sum of Rs 22,000 per acre for Nehri and Chahi land, Rs 8000 per acre for Barani land and Rs 4000 per acre for Gair-mumkin (waste) land. On reference under Section 18, the Additional District Judge, by his award and decree dated 6-8-1983, enhanced compensation for Nehri and Chahi lands to Rs 36,000 per acre and for Gair-mumkin land at the rate of Rs 6000 per acre. On appeal under Section 54 of the Act, the learned Single Judge confirmed the award of the Additional District Judge by his judgment and decree dated 3-8-1984 and maintained the decree. In letters patent appeal, the Division Bench enhanced the market value of Nehri land to Rs 37,000 per acre by its judgment and decree dated 17-9-1985. Thus this appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the Division Bench for further enhancement.
3. The appellants claim further enhancement at par with the amount awarded by the High Court to the lands situated in Bachu Khurd, Bachu Kalan and Mehna at the rate of Rs 90,000 per acre up to a depth of 500 metres, Rs 50,000 per acre for Chahi and Nehri land etc. The contention of Shri Javali, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, is that the LAO made the award on the same day for the lands in Bhagu as well as other villages at the rate of Rs 22,000 per acre for Nehri and Chahi lands. The lands in these cases are also Nehri and Chahi lands. That was ultimately enhanced by the High Court to Rs 50,000 per acre which was affirmed by this Court in Union of India v. Zora Singh (1992) 1 SCC 673. The appellants, therefore, are entitled to payment of the same compensation. It is also contended that the lands are situated near the Abadi (built-up residential area) of Bhatinda and the lands in Bhagu are also very near to the Railway Station in Phoos Mandi. The Industrial Training Institute, Bhatinda, is situated at a distance of 4 kms and Bhagu and Phoos Mandi are at a distance of one km from each other. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs 50,000 per acre. The Division Bench of the High Court, relying upon four sale transactions, determined the compensation at the rate of Rs 37,000 per acre on an average and awarded the same on its basis. This Court repeatedly has held that the application of the principle of average price is wrong and illegal. We have seen that before the LAO, the appellants seem to have claimed at the rate of Rs 35,000 per acre and before the District Court, they claimed at the rate of Rs 60,000 per acre. In other words, the High Court had granted an amount higher than the amount claimed pursuant to the notice under Sections 9 and 10. The evidence relied upon by the claimants relates to sale transactions from the same acquired lands which fetched at the maximum rate of Rs 40,000 per acre when the land of 4 kanals 6 marlas was sold. When the lands of 527 acres in huge parcels were acquired it would be preposterous to think that they would fetch the same market value or near about the same market value if a willing buyer bargained from a willing vendor for such lands. The High Court has given the maximum compensation for the lands in question. It is true that some evidence has been brought from the judgment of the High Court of the lands situated in another village covered by the same notification and ultimately decided in Zora Singh case (1992) 1 SCC 673. The market value for Nehri and Chahi lands was determined at the rate of Rs 50,000 per acre. This Court did not consider the case on merits. The SLPs of the Union Government were dismissed without a speaking order.
4. The judgment of the High Court is not a part of the record. We cannot treat it as a proper basis. There must be evidence for the purpose of determining the market value of the respective prevailing prices in each village. The situation of the lands, their quality and all other relevant facts are necessary and be taken into consideration to enhance the market value which is absolutely lacking in these cases. In these cases, the claimants themselves have produced the sale deeds from their own lands. So it is not necessary to travel to other village to determine the market value of the lands in Bhagu Village. If that be so, they cannot get more than Rs 37,000 per acre as awarded by the High Court. We may make it clear that the State had not filed any appeal at any point of time ever against the orders of the Additional District Judge or against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court.
5. In view of the foregoing discussion, we need not go into the correctness of the judgment of the Additional District Judge or of the Division Bench. We do not find any ground warranting further enhancement. Therefore, the appeals are dismissed. No costs.
Alert