- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Notification under Section 4 (1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (I of 1894 (for short "the Act") was published in the State Gazette on 27/4/19722 acquiring 1 acre 6 gunthas of land for defence purpose. It is not in dispute that the property was requisitioned under Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (for short "the Property Act") on 29/3/1965 and possession thereof was taken. Subsequently, under Section 7 of the Property Act, for determination of the rentals payable to the requisitioned property, market value of the property was fixed at Rs. 4. 00 per sq. ft. and rents were paid on that basis. After notification under Section 4 (1 was published, the Collector made his award on 31/1/1976 under Section 11 of the Act determining the compensation at Rs. 24,250. 00 per acre. Dissatisfied therewith, on reference under Section 18, the court enhanced the compensation by its award and decree made undersection 26 of the Act on 30/6/1982 at Rs. 75,000. 00 per acre. On appeal by the State as well as by the claimants, the High court in the impugned Judgment dated 27/8/1991 made in MFAs Nos. 111 and 112 of 1983 dismissed the State appeal and enhanced the compensation in the claimants' appeal to Rs. 5. 00 per sq. ft.
(3.) The High court proceeded on the finding that the lands were well developed as on the date of the requisition as well as on the date of publishing the notification under Section 4 (1 of the Act. When the rentals under Section 7 of the Property Act was determined at the rate of Rs. 4. 00 per sq. ft. , the determination of the compensation, after 8 years in 1972 at the rate of Rs. 5. 00 per sq. ft. would be just, fair and adequate. As regards the deduction of 53% towards developmental charges, the High court found that since the lands were already situated in a developed area, deduction was not warranted. Therefore, no deduction was made. Thus these appeals by special leave and the cross-objections are filed by the respondents.;