Land Acquisition Act, 1894

23.Matters to be considered in determining compensation:-

(1) In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under this Act, the court shall take into consideration-

first, the market-value of the land at the date of the publication of the {Subs, by Act 38 of 1923, s.7, for "declaration relating thereto under s.6."} [notification under section 4, sub-section (1)];

secondly, the damage by the person interested, by reason of the taking of any standing crops or trees which may be on the land at the time of the Collector's taking possession thereof;

thirdly, the damage (if any) sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector's taking possession taking possession of the land, by the reason of severing such land from his other land;

fourthly, the damage (if any) sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other property, movable or immovable, in any other manner, or his earnings;

fifthly, if in the consequence of the acquisition of the land by the Collector, the person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business, the reasonable expenses (if any) incidental to such change; and

sixthly, the damage (if any) bona fide resulting from diminution of the profits of the land between the time of the publication of the declaration under section 6 and the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land.

(2) In addition to the market-value of the land as above provided the Court shall in every case award a sum of fifteen per centum on such market-value, in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition.  

Comment: "It is settled law that the burden of proof of market value prevailing as on the date of publication of Section 4(1) notification is always on the claimants. Though this Court has time and again pointed out the apathy and blatant lapse on the part of the acquiring officer to adduce evidence and also improper or ineffective or lack of interest on the part of the counsel for the State to cross-examine the witnesses on material facts, it is the duty of the Court to carefully scrutinise the evidence and determine just and adequate compensation. If the sale deeds are fond to be genuine, the market value mentioned therein must be presumed to be correct. If the genuineness is doubted, it cannot be relied upon, Proper tests and principles laid down by this Court must be applied to determine compensation." Hookiyar Singh v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Moradabad AIR 1996 SUPREME

COURT 3207

Back

Index

Next