Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Phanga Ram and ors. - Court Judgment |
| Property |
| Supreme Court of India |
| Oct-01-1986 |
| Civil Appeals Nos. 3868-72 of 1986 |
| A.P. Sen and; B.C. Ray, JJ. |
| 1986Supp(1)SCC737 |
| Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4(1) |
| Union of India (Uoi) |
| Phanga Ram and ors. |
| Appeal Allowed |
-
[ a.p. sen and; b.c. ray, jj.] -- land acquisition act, 1894 — section 23 — compensation — capitalisation method for fixing market value — 15 years' purchase rule laid down in shanti devi case to be applied as multiplier for determining compensation — district court and high court erred in applying 20 years' purchase rule — claimants also entitled to solatium of 15 per cent on the compensation so computed from the date of possession of the land till the date of payment -- in these cases, the delay is condoned. substitution allowed. in smt shanti devi case1 this court has laid down that the proper multiplier to be adopted for the purpose of capitalisation based on the rate of return at the relevant date i.e. the dates of notifications issued under section 4(1) of the act in the years 1962 and 1963 would be “fifteen” and that the courts were wrong in adopting the rule of twenty years purchase......under section 4(1) of the land acquisition act, 1894 in the years 1962 and 1963. in smt shanti devi case1 this court has laid down that the proper multiplier to be adopted for the purpose of capitalisation based on the rate of return at the relevant date i.e. the dates of notifications issued under section 4(1) of the act in the years 1962 and 1963 would be “fifteen” and that the courts were wrong in adopting the rule of twenty years purchase. accordingly, the proper basis of fixing compensation in these cases being fifteen years' purchase, the compensation awarded for lands in these cases should be reduced by one-fourth. the claimants shall get solatium of 15 per cent on the compensation computed on the above basis on the aggregate amount from the date of taking possession of the land till the date of payment.3. the result therefore is that the appeals must succeed and are allowed. the judgment and decrees of the courts below shall stand modified accordingly. costs shall be borne by the parties as incurred.
A.P. Sen and; B.C. Ray, JJ.
1. In these cases, the delay is condoned. Substitution allowed. Special leave granted.
2. These appeals are concluded by the decision of this Court in Union of India v. Smt Shanti Devi1 and must be allowed. In these cases, both the High Court as well as the learned Additional District Judge applied the twenty years' purchase rule for determining the compensation of these lands acquired under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the years 1962 and 1963. In Smt Shanti Devi case1 this Court has laid down that the proper multiplier to be adopted for the purpose of capitalisation based on the rate of return at the relevant date i.e. the dates of notifications issued under Section 4(1) of the Act in the years 1962 and 1963 would be “fifteen” and that the courts were wrong in adopting the rule of twenty years purchase. Accordingly, the proper basis of fixing compensation in these cases being fifteen years' purchase, the compensation awarded for lands in these cases should be reduced by one-fourth. The claimants shall get solatium of 15 per cent on the compensation computed on the above basis on the aggregate amount from the date of taking possession of the land till the date of payment.
3. The result therefore is that the appeals must succeed and are allowed. The judgment and decrees of the courts below shall stand modified accordingly. Costs shall be borne by the parties as incurred.