Appeal No 1827 of 1970
From the Judgment and Decree dated 28 4 1970 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court Gwalior Bench in First Appeal No 133 of 1968
SN Andley and Uma Dutta for the appellants Ram Panjwani and HS Harihar for the respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHANNA J
This is an appeal on certificate by Prithvi Raj Taneja now deceased and represented by his legal repre sentatives against the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court whereby the High Court partially accepted the appeal filed by the appellant regarding the quantum of compensa tion for the acquisition of land
A plot of land measuring 27 bighas and 17 biswas situated in Ashok Nagar district Guna belonging to the appellant was acquired for the construction of a police station and residential quarters for policemen
A bigha it is stated is equivalent to 2500 square yards
The land sought to be acquired measured 68658 square yards
Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for the acquisition of the land was issued on April 7 1961
The Land Acquisition Officer as per award dated June 13 1961 awarded compensation for the land at the rate of Rs 100 per bigha
In addition to that he awarded a sum of Rs 1175 for large trees and Rs 1380 for small trees standing on the land
The appellant was also awarded Rs 1000 as compensation for a well which had been sunk in the land and Rs 800 for a house standing on the land In all the appellant was awarded a sum of Rs 7616
including solatium at the rate
of fifteen per cent by the Land Acqui sition Officer
The appellant wanted compensation for the land at the rate of Rs 10 per square yard
He accordingly had the matter referred to the District Judge
Learned Additional District Judge determined the market value of the land in question to be Rs 900 per bigha
Regarding the well the Additional District Judge awarded compensation of Rs 3000 as against the amount of Rs 1000 which had been awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer
In other respects the award of the Land Acquisition Officer was upheld
Computing solatium at the rate of 10 per cent the
total amount awarded by District Judge to the appellant was Rs 32285 besides interest at the rate of six per cent per annum
The appellant not being satisfied with the award of the Additional District Judge took the matter in appeal to the High Court
The High Court awarded compensation to the appellant at the rate of Re 1
per square yard for the land in question
The High Court also awarded Rs 2500 for the loss of earnings to the appellant
The rate of solatium for compulsory acquisition was increased by the High Court from ten per cent to fifteen per cent
In all the appel lant was held entitled to a compensation of Rs 88381 besides interest at the rate of six per cent per annum
The appellant thereupon obtained a certificate of fit ness for appeal to this Court under article 1331a of the Constitution as it stood at that time
In appeal before us Mr Andley on behalf of the appel lant has argued that more than half of the land in dispute is within
the municipal limits of Ashok Nagar Municipality while the remaining land was also likely to be included within those limits shortly
It is further stated that the land in question abutts Ashok Nagar Isagarh Road and is situated near the tehsil building and the railway station
Learned counsel has also referred to the fact that small plots of land adjoining the land in dispute were sold at rates of Rs 9 and Rs 8 per square yard during the years 1958 to 1960
In this respect we find that the High Court has considered most of the above circumstances and has come to the conclusion that Re 1 per square yard represents fair market value of the land in dispute
The High Court has also referred to the special circumstances under which the small plots were sold and their price was fixed
We agree with the High Court that the price 635 paid for small plots of land cannot provide a safe criterion for determining the amount of compensation for a vast area of land
We may in this context refer to a recent judgment in the case of Smt
Padma Uppal etc
vs State of Punjab  Ors
C wherein this Court observed that it is well settled that in determining compensation the value fetched for small plots of land cannot be applied to the lands covering a very large area and that the large area of land cannot possibly fetch a price at the same rate at which small plots are sold
Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act provides that in mining the amount of compensation to be awarded for the land acquired under the Act the Court shall take into
account inter alia the market value of the land at the date of the publication of the notification under section 4 of the Act
The market value means the price that a willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller for the property having due regard to its existing condition with all its existing advantages and its potential possibilities when laid out in the most advantageous manner excluding any advantage due to the carrying out of the scheme for which the property is compulsorily acquired
In considering market value the disinclination of the vendor to part with his land and the urgent necessity of the purchaser to buy should be disregarded
There is an element of guess work inherent in most cases involving determination of the market value of the acquired land
But this in the very nature of things cannot be helped
The essential thing is to keep in view the relevant factors prescribed by the Act
If the judgment of the High Court reveals that it has taken into consideration the relevant factors the assessment of the market value of the acquired land should not be dis turbed see Thakur Kanta Prasad Singh dead by L rs
vs State of Bihar2
After having been taken through the material on the record we find no infirmity in the judgment of the High Court as might induce us to disturb its find ing
The appeal consequently fails and is dismissed but in the circumstances without costs
Appeal dismissed


Summary:
The appellant s land was acquired and compensation was awarded to him by the Land Acquisition Officer
Demanding a higher amount the appellant had the matter referred to the District Judge who increased the award but still discon tented the appellant went in appeal
The High Court also increased the compensation but could not satisfy the appel lant who thereupon obtained leave to appeal to the Supreme Court contending that small plots of land adjoining his large area were sold at much higher rates
Dismissing the appeal the Court HELD 1
The price  paid for small plots of laud cannot provide a safe criterion for determining the amount of compensation for a vast area of land
The large area of land cannot possibly fetch a price at the same rate at which small plots are sold
635 A B Smt
Padma Uppal etc
vs State of Punjab  Ors
  applied
The essential thing is to keen in view the relevant factors prescribed by the Act
If the judgment of the High Court reveals that it has taken into consideration the relevant factors the assessment of the market value of the acquired land should not be disturbed
635 D E Thakur Kanta Prasad Singh dead by L Rs vs State of Bihar   applied