AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sunil Hali, J.—Land measuring 4 kanals and 10 marlas bearing Khasra No. 5 min situated at Village Theed Tehsil and District Srinagar was
acquired for public purpose, namely, Development of Dal Lake. A corrigendum dated 30.10.2000 was issued to the notice in terms of Section
4(1) reducing the area of land for the purpose of acquisition from 4 kanals 10 marlas to 3 kanal 15 marlas and 200 Sfts. Acquisition proceedings
were initiated by the Collector culminating in passing of an award @ of Rs. 8.00 lacs per kanal with 15% as jabirana.
Feeling dissatisfied with the award, reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made in the matter before Principal District
Judge, Srinagar. On entering into the reference, the reference court enhanced the compensation from 8.00 lacs per kanal to 13.00 lacs per kanal.
Dissatisfied with this, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants.
Dispute in the present appeal relates to the determination of the market value of the land from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act
which this court is required to consider while analyzing the aforementioned exigencies as to what is true market value of the land. Some of the
important methods for determination of market value are as under:
Comparable sale rates of the area where land is situated;
The average sale rates in the area as also its potential market value to which the land can be used; and
The location of the land and the comparable sale rates on the date of notification.
It is in the light of aforementioned principles that market value of land is to be determined. The claimants in support of their contention examined
PW Habibullah Mir, PW Mohd Rajab Dar, PW Mohd Aslam Hakim, and PW Mohd Sidiq Sheikh, whereas the respondents have examined
Mohd Maqbool Wani, Collector as their witness. The witnesses of the claimants have deposed that the market value of the land is more than what
has been awarded by the Collector and have shown the rate of the same at Rs. 50 lacs per kanal. However, no sale deed has been produced by
these witnesses except by one Mohd Sidiq Sheikh, who has stated that Contractor Talib Hussain purchased two kanals of land at Boulevard and
constructed a house thereon. He states that he has attested signatures as a marginal witness of the said sale deed. Certified copy of the said sale
deed has been produced in the court, which shows that the land has been sold for an amount of Rs. 36,70,000/. However, contents of the sale
deed have not been proved by the vendee or vender. Other material which has come on record is a certificate issued by the Divisional
Commissioner, Kashmir on the basis of verification of market value of the land made by the Tehsildar, Srinagar. As per verification of the
Tehsildar, the prevalent market value of the land in the said village is 15.00 lacs per kanal. The Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir in his certificate
has stated that the market value of the land is 13.00 lacs per kanal.
Relying on the certificate issued by the Divisional Commissioner, the reference court has enhanced the award from 8.00 lacs per kanal to 13.00
lacs per kanal. Contention of the appellants that the market value of the land is 30.00 lacs per kanal has been rejected by the reference court.
While determining the market value of the land, comparable sale rates of the area, where land is situated, average sale rates in the area as also
its potential market value to which the land can be used are the main factors for determining the market value the land. The land in question is
located in no construction zone. Intend purpose of acquisition of the land is for beautifying the Dal Lake for which there is complete ban on
construction. It can be safely said that said land can not be used for commercial purpose. Reliance place on the sale deed executed pertains to
Boulevard area where hotel has been constructed. Its market value is admittedly more than that of land in question. The appellants have not
produced any sale deed of the vicinity of the land in question. The assessment made by the Tehsildar can be taken into account for purpose of
determining market value of the land as it relates to the area where land is situated. It has been relied by the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir
vide his certificate dated 10.07.2002. The Tehsildar made verification only after examining the sale rates of the area. The reference court has rightly
placed reliance on the certificate issued by the Divisional Commissioner based on the assessment made by the Tehsildar, Srinagar. The sale deed
filed by the appellants/claimants of Boulevard area indicates that the prevalent rates of the land at that time was 36.00 lacs per kanal, even though
the sale deed has not been proved by the vendee or vender under Section 49A of the Land Acquisition Act. A certified copy of a document
registered under Registration Act, Samvat 1977, including a copy given under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of transaction
recorded in such document. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of Supreme Court reported in 'Supreme Court Judgment on Land
Acquisition (19942004)' titled, Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer vs. V. Narasaiah. Para 14 of the said judgment is quoted
herein below:
The word ""may be accepted as evidence"" in the Section indicate that there is no compulsion on the court to accept such transaction as evidence
but it is open to the court to treat them as evidence. Merely accepting them as evidence does not mean that the court is bound to treat them as
reliable evidence. What sought to be achieved is that the transactions recorded in the documents may be treated as evidence, just like any other
evidence and it is for the court to weigh all the pros and cons to decide whether such transaction can be relied on for understanding the real price
of the land concerned.
Reliance placed in the said sale deed cannot be applied in the present case for the reason that land in question is situated in an area which is no
construction zone, and has no potential of becoming a commercial area.
Verification made by the Tehsildar shows that cost of the land is 15.00 lacs per kanal and on that verification the Divisional Commissioner has
issued the certificate showing cost of the land as 13.00 lacs per kanal. The reason for reducing the cost of the land from 15.00 per kanal to 13.00
lacs per kanal has not been indicated by the Divisional Commissioner. He did not have personal knowledge nor has he disclosed any reason in the
certificate while reducing the rates of the land from 15.00 lacs per kanal to 13.00 lacs per kanal. I deem it proper that the cost of the land is 15.00
lacs per kanal as was determined by the Tehsildar, Srinagar.
For the reason stated herein above, the appellants are entitled to compensation at the rate of 15.00 lacs per kanal. The appeal is, accordingly,
allowed to the extent stated herein above. Connected matters shall also stand disposed of.