Summary
Land at Yavatmal was acquired for BSNL under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; the Collector awarded Rs 13.32 per sq ft and the Reference Court enhanced it to Rs 21, refusing to rely on the stamp-duty Ready Reckoner after the Government witnesses admitted it was prepared only for collecting stamp duty and did not reflect actual market prices. The Bombay High Court, relying on a Government Resolution of 31.10.1994 and its Full Bench decision in Shalini Vaman Godbole, raised compensation to Rs 174 per sq ft on the Ready Reckoner rates. The Supreme Court restored the Reference Court's award. Jawajee Nagnatham and Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, binding under Article 141, hold that basic valuation registers or ready reckoners maintained for stamp duty have no statutory basis for determining market value under Section 23;
Issues
- Whether rates in a Ready Reckoner prepared under stamp law for collection of stamp duty can form the basis for determining market value of acquired land under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether a State Government Resolution directing that Ready Reckoner valuation be adopted for compensation, and a High Court Full Bench decision following it, can prevail over binding decisions of the Supreme Court.
- What method governs determination of market value of acquired land.
Provisions considered
- Sections 4, 18 and 23, Land Acquisition Act, 1894Market value is to be determined as on the Section 4 notification by expert opinion, bona fide comparable sales within a reasonable time, or capitalisation of profits; a reference under Section 18 is an original proceeding in which the claimant must prove inadequacy of the award. The Reference Court applied these principles and the Ready Reckoner could not displace them. (¶¶ 8, 9, 10, 11)
- Section 47-A and ready reckoner / basic valuation registers, Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (as amended in the States) and Maharashtra Stamp (Determination of True Market Value of Property) Rules, 1995Valuation registers maintained for levy of stamp duty have no statutory foundation for fixing market value of land and apply uniform rates to an entire area; they cannot form the basis of compensation under Section 23 (Jawajee Nagnatham, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Lal Chand). (¶¶ 8, 9, 11)
- Article 141, Constitution of IndiaThe High Court erred in following its own Full Bench and a Government Resolution instead of the binding decisions of the Supreme Court on the very question. (¶¶ 7, 12)
Held
- Whether Ready Reckoner or basic valuation register rates can found compensation has been settled by this Court: such registers have no statutory base, cannot determine market value even for registration, and equally cannot be the basis under Section 23; the burden lies on the claimant to prove market value through sale deeds of the same or similar lands or other relevant evidence. (¶¶ 8, 9)
- The Reference Court rightly rejected the Ready Reckoner on the admissions of PW-3 and PW-4 that it was prepared only for stamp duty and registration and that actual sale prices differ from its rates; the High Court's 800% enhancement to Rs 174 per sq ft resting on it was a serious error. (¶¶ 9, 11)
- Market value depends on location, size, development, frontage and the many plus and minus factors catalogued in Chimanlal Hargovinddas, so there cannot be one market value for different lands; uniform area-wide Ready Reckoner rates are inherently unsuitable for that determination, and the Government Resolution of 31.10.1994 describing the reckoner as scientifically prepared cannot alter the position, being contrary to the law declared by this Court. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12)
Result
Appeal allowed; the Bombay High Court's judgment of 20.01.2021 in First Appeal No. 1302 of 2009 quashed and the Reference Court's award of compensation at Rs 21 per sq ft restored. No order as to costs.