Trees on acquired land form part of market value, so statutory compensation allowance applies to their assessed value.

Trees standing on acquired land are treated as part of the land itself for determining market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, so their assessed value cannot be separated to deny the statutory allowance. The statutory addition under Section 23(2) therefore applies to the value attributable to the trees. Costs remained a matter of judicial discretion, and no interference was warranted where the claim was found to be highly exaggerated and the evidence largely unacceptable. The appeal succeeded only to the extent of securing the statutory allowance on the value of the trees, and otherwise failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the value of trees standing on acquired land forms part of the market value of the land so as to attract the statutory allowance under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; (ii) whether the award of costs made by the courts below required interference.

Issue (i): Whether the value of trees standing on acquired land forms part of the market value of the land so as to attract the statutory allowance under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Analysis: Section 3(a) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 defines land to include things attached to the earth. Trees standing on the acquired land are therefore part of the land itself, and their value is taken only for the purpose of determining the market value of the land under Section 23(1). Once the market value is determined, the statutory allowance under Section 23(2) must be added. The Court accepted the view that compensation assessed on the trees standing on the acquired land could not be separated from the land for the purpose of denying the statutory addition.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to the statutory allowance of 15% under Section 23(2) on the value of the trees standing on the acquired land.

Issue (ii): Whether the award of costs made by the courts below required interference.

Analysis: Costs are a matter of judicial discretion. The claim made by the appellants was found to be highly exaggerated and the evidence largely unacceptable. In those circumstances, the refusal to grant costs did not disclose any error warranting interference.

Conclusion: The order as to costs was not interfered with.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of securing the statutory addition on the value of the trees, and failed in all other respects.

Ratio Decidendi: Trees standing on land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 are part of the land for purposes of determining market value, and the statutory allowance under Section 23(2) must be applied to that value.

---