MANEK JAMSHEDJI RATANSHAH GHEYARA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER SURAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Deplorable as it is it is not realised by many of the trial Judges even so late in day that in Land Acquisition References when market value of land under acquisition is required to be determined by the instances method it has to be done on the basis of the market value reflected in the instances most proximate from the time and situation angle. And that this has to be done by correlating the value reflected in the ideal instance by a process of ratiocination by putting oneself in the shoes of a hypothetical purchaser. What we have realized from a number of judgments we have come across in the course of this sitting is that so often the trial Judges merely reproduce the evidence at length and thereafter pronounce the market value without undertaking any metho- dical exercise in correlation or ratiocination. It almost becomes ipse dixit of the trial Judge. To illustrate the point we may refer to what has been done by the learned trial Judge in toe land reference giving rise to the present appeal arising out of the acquisition of a large tract of land belonging to Parsi Panchayat Surat for the public purpose of constructing buildings for the Gujarat Housing Board pursuant to a Notification under sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 published on 4/11/1965 After reproducing and we repeat merely reproducing the oral and documentary evidence the learned trial Judge has recorded his conclusion as regards the market value of the land under acquisition as under:

(2.) In the instant case evidence pertaining to nine instances was cited on behalf of the claimants and evidence pertaining to one instance was cited on behalf of the State. It is not necessary to enter into the details pertaining to the various transactions inasmuch as we find that there exists one transaction which is comparable from the view point of the relevant date of the notification under sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act namely 4/11/1965 This transaction is reflected in sale deed Ex. 78 The transaction was recorded on 22/09/1964 The land belonging to the appellant Parsi Panchayat was sold to Surat Electricity Company. The land was comprised in S. Nos. 2 and 13 respectively admeasuring 18 997 sq. yds and 7 744 sq. yds. The land was sold at Rs. 10.50 per sq.yd. The evidence shows that this land is situated at a distance of 250 yards from the land under acquisition. It is therefore comparable from the stand point of situation. The transaction is recorded some one year prior to the date of the Notification with which we are concerned. It is therefore a transaction which can be safely taken into account for the purpose of evaluating the land under acquisition. The evidence pertaining to this transaction was provided by C. W. 1 Sorabji Rustamji Katpitia whose desposition is recorded at Ex. 27. No questions were put to this witness under cross examination in order to elicit any circumstance justifying discarding of this transaction. The parcels of the land in this transaction are large parcels. One of the parcels is of 18 997 sq. yds. Thus a meaningful comparison can be made even from the view point of size of the parcels. The market value reflected in this transaction is Rs. 10. 50 per sq. yds. in September 1964. In November 1965 the land under acquisition safely can therefore be valued at Rs. 10.50 per sq. yd on the same basis. Since however the appellant has claimed only. Rs. 9.00 per sq. yd. as market value of the land under acquisition the same can be valued without any hesitation at the rate of Rs. 9.00 per sq. yd.

(3.) In view of the market value reflected in the aforesaid transaction which in our opinion is comparable in all respects to the land under acquisition the appeal must be allowed and 1 the market value of the land under acquisition as on the material date must be determined at Rs. 9.00 per sq. yd. 2 The respondents shall pay to the appellant additional compensation at the rate Rs. 2.00 per sq.yd. representing the difference between the rate determined by us (Rs. 9/- per sq. yd.) and the rate determined by the learned trial Judge (Rs. 7/- per sq. yd.); 3 the respondents shall pay to the appellant solatium at the rate of 150 on the additional amount of compensation granted by this Court.