Naidu Vs. Sub Collector of Chidambaram  INSC 191 (14 August 1992)
T.K. (J) THOMMEN, T.K. (J) RAMASWAMI, V. (J) II SINGH N.P. (J)
CITATION: 1992 SCR (3) 890 1992 SCC (4) 78 JT 1992 (4) 508 1992 SCALE (2)208
Acquisition Act, 1894:
12, 18-Land with road and drainage-Developed for building sites-Acquisition of
Compensation-Proportionate deduction towards roads and drainage-Whether
State's appeal against enhancement of compensation for a compact area of 10
acres of land laid out as building sites with fully formed roads and drainage,
and acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the High Court reduced the
compensation holding that since the roads and drainage occupied a part of the
area acquired, proportionate deduction in compensation ought to be made. The
claimant filed appeal by special leave to this Court.
the appeal, this Court, Held: 1.1. The High Court was wrong in principle in
reducing the compensation on account of roads and drainage.
fact that these improvements had been made on the land acquired shows that what
was acquired was more valuable than what it would have been without the
improvements. [p. 891E- F] 1.2. Accordingly, the judgment of the High Court is
set aside and that of the Reference Court
APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1210 of 1984.
the Judgment and Order dated 28.8.1980 of the Madras High Court in Appeal No.
213 of 1978.
kumar for the Appellant.
Mohan, T. Raja and R. Nedumaran for the Respondent.
The following Order of the Court was delivered:
acres of land belonging to the appellant had been acquired under the Land
Acquisition Act. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate
of one rupee one paise per sq. ft. On a reference under section 18 of the Act,
the Court enhanced the rate of compensation to Rs. 2.25 per sq. ft. On appeal
by the State, the High Court by the impugned judgment reduced the compensation
to Rs. 2.00 per sq. ft.
reason stated by the High Court for so reducing the rate of compensation was
that the acquired area was a compact plot of 10 acres which was laid out as
building sites with fully formed roads and drainage. The High Court held that since
the roads and drainage occupied a part of the area acquired, proportionate
deduction in compensation ought to be made.
for the appellant submits that what was acquired was a compact area of 10
acres. The fact that roads and drainage had been laid out does not reduce the
value of the land acquired. In fact the appellant had incurred expenditure in
preparing the land as building sites, and the High Court ought to have accepted
his contention that he was entitled to higher compensation.
no reason why the High Court should have reduced the compensation awarded by
the Reference Court on the ground that roads and
drainage had been laid out. The fact that these improvements had been made on
the land shows that what was acquired was more valuable than what it would have
been without the improvements. The reason given by the High Court for reducing
the compensation awarded by the Reference Court was wrong in principle. Accordingly, we set aside the
impugned judgment of the High Court and restore that of the Reference Court.
appeal is allowed in the above terms. No Costs.