Landowner Seeking Enhanced Compensation Must Prove Market Value Of Land Acquired Is Different From The One Assessed By Collector: J&K High Court

A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar maintained that so long as the land owner/ owners fail to discharge the burden cast on them, there is no question of the Reference court granting any enhancement.

Background:

The case stemmed from the act of the Notified Area Committee, Kupwara, in 1997 when it initiated land acquisition in Kupwara for a Town Hall project. The Collector determined the market value at Rs. 80,000 per kanal.

Respondents Khazir Mohammad Malik and other landowners, dissatisfied with the compensation, filed an application under Section 18 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act before the Collector. This section allows landowners to challenge the Collector's award by requesting a reference to the District Judge (Reference Court).

The Reference Court considered the arguments presented by both parties. The Notified Area Committee argued that the landowners lacked evidence to support their claim of a higher market value. In contrast, the landowners contended that their land held commercial value and warranted greater compensation.

The Reference Court, in its judgment, acknowledged that the landowners hadn't established a higher market value. However, it proceeded to increase the compensation amount.

The Notified Area Committee contested the Reference Court's decision, arguing that the enhancement was unjustified as the landowners had not substantiated their claim. They pointed out the inconsistency in the Reference Court's judgment, which acknowledged the lack of proof but still increased the compensation.

Observations Of The High Court:

Justice Dhar, meticulously examining the case, highlighted the discrepancy in the Reference Court's judgment and pointed out that the Court had awarded higher compensation while acknowledging the landowners' lack of evidence.

Justice Dhar firmly emphasized the established legal principle, citing Supreme Court judgments like Land Acquisition Officer vs. Sidapa Omanna Tumari (1995) and Major Pakhar Singh Atwal vs. State of Punjab (1995) which clearly state that the burden of proving an inadequate market value assessment by the Collector lies with the landowner seeking increased compensation.

Scrutinising the evidence presented by the landowners with respect to their claims regarding market value the court said, “.. none of them have either sold or purchased any land in the vicinity of the acquired land. Their assessment of the market value of the land in question is not based upon their personal knowledge. The same is only based upon guesswork on their part”.

The court added, “Since the evidence led by the land owners before the Reference Court is not reliable and, as such, it cannot be stated that the land owners have discharged their burden of proving that the market value of the land assessed by the Collector is not correct”.

Terming the enhancement of compensation by the Reference Court by fixing the market value of the acquired land at a higher rate contrary to its own finding, the court set aside its order and the order of the Collector was upheld.

Case Title: ADMINISTRATOR NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE KUPWARA Vs KHAZIR MOHAMMAD MALIK AND OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 174

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment