SHIVLAL KESHAVLAL SHAH Vs. ADDL SPL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
LAWS(GJH)-1966-11-7
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on November 02,1966

SHIVLAL KESHAVLAL SHAH Appellant
VERSUS
ADDL.SPL.LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

A.R.BAKSHI, M.U.SHAH - (1.) On account of the acquisition of certain lands for the purpose of remodelling the railway yard at Asarwa and for the purpose of construction of a road six cases arose for award of compensation out of which we are concerned with Compensation Cases Nos. 157/58 165 and 163/58. These cases were by consent of parties consolidated and heard together and the evidence was recorded in Case No. 165 of 1958 which was treated as the main case. All these cases were disposed of by a common judgment by the learned Joint Judge at Ahmedabad on 30 November 1959 Appeal No. 745 of 1960 is in respect of Compensation Case No. 157. Appeal No. 785 of 1960 is against the decree passed in Compensation Case No. 165 of 1955 and Appeal No. 1031 of 1960 is in respect of Compensation Case No. 163 of 1958. As these three cases were disposed of by a common judgment these three appeals will also be disposed of by one judgment. .................
(2.) It would be seen from the above discussion that the lease-deeds which have been produced show a market rate far in excess of the rate which is claimed by the appellants. Most of the leases show a rate exceeding Rs. 100.00 per square yard ant as the evidence of the tenants has not been adduced it is not possible to know the circumstances under which the tenants agreed to pay the rent. The evidence in the shape of rental value no doubt can be taken Into consideration for fixing the market value of lands but on the face of the transactions it appears that the rate which the annual rent Indicates when capitalized is abnormally high and moreover there is other evidence on the record which would indicate the market value of the lands in the area where the acquired lands are situated. The evidence referred to above consists of swards Exs. 87 89 and 90 given by the Land Acquisition Officer in respect of lands situated on the Naroda Road. Ex. 87 is an award in respect of acquisition of 7912 square yards of land out of S. No. 525 which were acquired in February 1951. Ex. 89 is an award by the Land Acquisition Officer in respect of 378 square yards of land which were acquired out of S. No. 525 in June 1956 and Ex. 90 is an award in respect of 605 square yards of land which were acquired out of S. No. 424 in August 1955 The rate that was allowed in respect of S. No. 87 was Rs. 7.00 per square yard Rs. 9.50 in respect of lands which were the subject matter of the award Ex. 89 and Rs. 8.00 per square yard in respect of lands the compensation of which was fixed by the award Ex. 90. S. Nos. 525 and 424 in respect of which these awards have been given are situated on the same Naroda Road on which S. No. 520B is situated. It is true that these two survey numbers are at a greater distance from the city side than S. No. 520B. but it does not appear that S. Nos. 525 and 424 are situated in a locality which is totally undeveloped. These awards thus indicate a price from Rs. 7 to 9 50 from 1951 to 1956 and can be utilised for the purpose of assessing the market value of the acquired lands after taking into consideration any particular advantage or disadvantage which would attach to these two survey numbers In comparison with the acquired lands. S. No. 525 which is the subject matter of award Exs. 87 and 89 is as stated above at some distance from the city but is situated on the main high way on which S. No 520/B Is situated also. The level of the acquired lands which are situated on the Naroda Road as it appears from the evidence is lower by about a foot and the level of the portion of S. No. 525 which is the subject matter of award Ex. 87 is also lower than the road by about 2 to 3 feet. The level of the portion of lands in S. No. 525 which are the subject matter of the award Ex. 89 does not appear to be lower than the Naroda Road whereas the level of the lands in S. No. 424 which is the subject matter of the award Ex. 90 is lower than the road by about 1 to 2 feet. Out of the acquired lands S. No. 520B is situated on the main Naroda Road which is a high way and therefore would be comparable with S. Nos. 525 and 424 which are also situated on the same road. Therefore we do not think that the rate of Rs. 10.00 which has been fixed by the learned Civil Judge for the purpose of assessing the market value of the acquired lands in S. No. 520B is unreasonable and would therefore require to be enhanced. S. No. 520A is a little here up but is nearer to the Naroda Road than S. Nos. 519 and 570 and the rate in respect of S. No. 520A must therefore be slightly higher than the other survey numbers In the rear. On a consideration of the rates indicated by awards Exs. 87 89 and 90 and taking into consideration all the factors relevant for the lands which are the subject matter of the awards and the acquired lands we are of the view that since S. No. 520A is slightly in the rear a rate of Rs. 5 25 would be a reasonable rate at which the market value of the 1 acquired out of that survey number should be assessed. As stated above S. Nos. 519 570 and 650 are in the rear and therefore it would be reasonable to award compensation in respect of these lands at the rate of Rs 4/- per square yard. As regards S. Nos. 557 and 646 which relate to Compensation Case No. 165 of 1958 and Compensation Case No. 163 of 1958 respectively (Appeals No 785 and 1031 of 1960) these lands are not situated on the Naroda Road which is a wider road and is a national high way but are situated on a narrower road starting from near the Asarwa tank going towards Omnagar Society. The importance of these pieces of land from the point of view of market value would not be as much as that of S. No. 520B which is situated on a high-way. These lands are also situated in the interior of the main Naroda Road and therefore we consider that it would be reasonable to assess the market value of S. Nos. 557 and 646 at the rate of Rs. 5.00 per square yard.
(3.) Before we work out the result of the aforesaid conclusion we may mention here that we have taken into consideration the three awards Exs. 87 89 sad 90 which were passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Our attention was drawn to a decision of the Bombay High Court reported in 61 B.L.R. 1033 (The special Land Acquisition Officer Bombay v. Lakhamsi Ghelabhai) in which it was held that a judgment in another Land Acquisition Reference not inter parties and in respect of another property situate in the vicinity of the land in question was not admissible as an instance from which market value of the land in question could be deduced. That judgment considers cases of awards which are by judgments from a Court and awards which are by a Land Acquisition Officer. Reference was made in the judgment referred to above to the case decided by the Privy Council of Secretary of State for India v. India General Steam Navigation and Railway Company I.L.R. 36 Calcutta 967 and it was observed at page 1039 that: I do not see either in this passage which deals with the contentions raised on behalf of the Secretary of State or anywhere else in the judgment Lord Collins either assuming or laying down the principle that a pervious judgment in another acquisition case is admissible. That question was not raised before the Board and the Board did not answer it as it was not called upon to do so. With great respect to the learned Judges who decided the cases reported in Madan Mohan v. Secy. of State and Secy. of State v. Amulya Charan it is difficult to see how the decision in the Secretary of State for India v. India General Steam Navigation and Railway Company can be regarded as an authority for the proposition they laid down.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.