SATISH KUMAR(D)THR. HIS LRS. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Satish Kumar(D)Thr. His Lrs.
STATE OF HARYANA
Click here to view full judgement.
ANIL R.DAVE,J. -
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) These appeals have been preferred by the appellants against the common judgment dated 26th April, 2010, passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in different appeals. By the impugned judgment, the High Court taking into consideration the size of the plots, which were exhibited for the purpose of comparison with the size of the plots acquired, cut the valuation by 60%.
(3.) The common judgment was challenged before this Court in the case of Ashrafi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. [(2013) 5 SCC 527]. This Court held therein :
"45. There is yet another set of lands forming the subject matter of the appeals arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.33637-33638 of 2011, filed by Manohar Singh and others, which are situated in Hansi, District Hisar. The said lands also form the subject matter of several other Special Leave Petitions, which will be covered by the decision in the above-mentioned Special Leave Petitions (now appeals). In the said cases, the High Court had assessed the compensation payable for the acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 805/- per sq. yard along with the statutory sums available under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act and solatium on the market value under Section 23(2) thereof. It was also indicated that the land owners would also be entitled to interest as provided under Section 28 of the Act.
46. While deciding the valuation of the lands, the High Court applied a cut of 60% and also took into consideration that the lands in question were small plots, the value whereof was definitely higher than the lands which had been acquired which were much larger in area.
47. In our view, the High Court was justified in taking into consideration the size of the plots, which were exhibited for the purposes of comparison with the size of the plots acquired, but we are unable to uphold the cut of 60%, which has been imposed by the High Court, since the acquired lands are already within developed municipal limits. In these cases also, a cut of one-third the value would be appropriate as in the other cases. Accordingly, we modify the valuation arrived at by the High Court upon imposing a cut of 60% and direct that the amount of compensation be re-assessed upon imposing a cut of 331/3 per cent while re-assessing the value of the land." ;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.