Fixation Of Minimum Value Does Not Disable A Land Owner From Getting The Actual Market Value If The Same Is Above The Minimum Value: Chhattisgarh HC

The appeals arose from a judgment dated 18.09.2018 passed by the learned judge of the High Court of Chhattisgarh declining to interfere with the course of action pursued by the Competent Authority as to fixation of compensation in respect of the compulsory acquisition of land.

The crux of the grievance projected by the Appellants is with regard to sustainability of the Award granting only a sum of 16,97,430/- in respect of 1370 sq.mt. of agricultural land situated on the side of the National Highway, while granting a sum of Rs. 65,01,600/- in respect of a piece of land having an extent of 144 sq.mt and such other higher amounts in respect of similar lesser extents situated by side or nearby, wrongly applying the formula for fixing the compensation; which is stated as contrary to the scheme of enactment and binding precedents rendered by the Apex court.

The learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that, under Section 26(1) of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 clearly states that the Competent authority is bound to reckon the higher market value by adopting the 'three' different criteria mentioned under clauses (a), (b) and ( c) and by ignoring the average sale price for similar type of land situated in the nearest village or nearest vicinity/area and fixing the same detrimental to the interest of the land owner having higher extent of land is not correct and proper.

Section 26 of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 reads as follows:

""26. Determination of market value of land by Collector.-(1) The Collector shall adopt the following criteria in assessing and determining the market value of land, namely:-

(a) the market value, if any, specified in the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899) for the registration of sale deeds or agreements to sell, as the case may be, in the area, where the land is situated; or

(b) the average sale price for similar type of land situated in the nearest village or nearest vicinity area; or

(c) consented amount of compensation as agreed upon under sub-section(2) of section 2 in case of acquisition of lands for private companies or for public private partnership projects, which ever is higher:

Provided that the date for determination of market value shall be the date on which the notification has been issued under section 11.

Explanation 1.- The average sale price referred to in clause (b) shall be determined taking into account the sale deeds or the agreements to sell registered for similar type of area in the near village or near vicinity area during immediately preceding three years of the year in which such acquisition of land is proposed to be made.

Explanation 2.- For determining the average sale price referred to in Explanation 1, one half of the total number of sale deeds or the agreements to sell in which the highest sale price has been mentioned shall be taken into account.

Explanation 3.- While determining the market value under this section and the average sale price referred to in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2, any price paid as compensation for land acquired under the provisions of this Act on an earlier occasion in the district shall not be

taken into consideration.

Explanation 4.- While determining the market value under this section and the average sale price referred to in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2, any price paid, which in the opinion of the Collector is not indicative of actual prevailing market value may be discounted for the purposes of calculating market value.

(2) The market value calculated as per sub-section (1) shall be multiplied by a factor to be specified in the First Schedule.

(3) Where the market value under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) cannot be determined for the reason that -

• the land is situated in such area where the transactions in land are restricted by or

under any other law for the time being in force in that area; or

• the registered sale deeds or agreements to sell as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (1) for similar land are not available for the immediately preceding three years; or

(c) the market value has not been specified under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899) by the appropriate authority, the State Government concerned shall specify the floor price or minimum price per unit area of the said land based on the price calculated in the manner specified in sub-section (1) in respect of similar types of land situated in the immediate adjoining areas :

Provided that in a case where the Requiring Body offers its shares to the owners of the lands (whose lands have been acquired) as a part compensation, for acquisition of land, such shares in no case shall exceed twenty-five per cent of the value so calculated under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) as the case may be :

Provided further that the Requiring Body shall in no case compel any owner of land (whose land has been acquired) to take its shares, the value of which is deductible in the value of the land calculated under sub- section (1) :

Provided also that the Collector shall, before initiation of any land acquisition proceedings in any area, take all necessary steps to revise and update the market value of the land on the basis of the prevalent market rate in that area :

Provided also that the appropriate Government shall ensure that the market value determined for acquisition of any land or property of an educational institution established and administered by a religious or linguistic minority shall be such as would not restrict or abrogate the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice."

The court after hearing both sides said that no registration or conveyance will be permitted below the minimum value notified to be reckoned for working out the stamp duty.

The court added,

"It does not mean that a bonafide purchaser can't show the actual value in a deed of conveyance, which may be of much higher than the minimum value and pay the requisite stamp duty accordingly. When such a property is compulsorily acquired, either under the provisions of

the N.H. Act or under the provisions of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the Competent Authority cannot say that the compensation will be paid only on the basis of 'minimum value' notified for registration of the conveyance deed, as above."

While allowing the appeal the court said that the fixation of minimum value does not and cannot disable a land owner from getting the actual market value, if the same is proved as of much above the minimum value.

Case details
Title: Ashutosh Agarwal v. Union of India
Case No: Writ Appeal No.7 of 2019
Quorum: Hon'ble Chief Justice P. R. Ramachandra Menon
Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Appearances: Shri Amit S. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with
Shri Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate (for appellants)
Shri Navin Shukla, Advocate appears on behalf of
Smt. Fouzia Mirza, Advocate (for respondents/ NHAI)
Shri Sudeep Agrawal, Deputy Advocate General (for respondents/State)

Click here to download the Judgment