Comparable sale instances in land valuation require similar plots and locality; unsupported market-value findings based on evidence were left undisturbed.

Comparable sale instances can be used for valuation only when the plots are similar and situated in a similar locality. Because the record did not show the relative location of the D.L.F. Industrial Estate and Sectors 27-A, 27-B, 27-C and 27-D, Faridabad, vis-a -vis Sector VI, or establish similarity in size and other relevant features, the Tribunal was justified in excluding those sales from the fair market value exercise. On the evidence, the Tribunal also found no material to show that the fair market value exceeded the consideration stated in the sale deed, and that factual finding was not open to appellate interference.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in excluding the sale instances of plots in D.L.F. Industrial Estate and Sectors 27-A, 27-B, 27-C and 27-D, Faridabad, while determining the fair market value of the property, and whether the finding that the fair market value did not exceed the apparent consideration could be interfered with in appeal.

Analysis: For valuation purposes, comparable sales must relate to similar plots situated in a similar locality. The record contained no material to show the relative location of the cited industrial estate and sectors vis-a -vis Sector VI, or to establish similarity in size and other relevant features. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was right in excluding those rates from consideration. On the evidence, the Tribunal further found no material to hold that the fair market value exceeded the consideration stated in the sale deed. That finding was one of fact and did not warrant appellate interference.

Conclusion: The exclusion of the cited sale instances was upheld, the finding on fair market value was sustained, and the appeal failed.

---