Vested compensation rights survive expiry of a temporary statute, with enhanced land value and interest allowed on excess compensation.

A vested right to compensation arising from completed acquisition under a temporary statute survives the expiry of that statute, so the compensation appeals remained maintainable. In fixing market value, the Court applied a willing seller and willing buyer standard, treated most of the land as irrigated agricultural land, and distinguished the poorer-quality portions; it also accepted the revenue-based valuation of the tube-wells. Claims for severance and business loss failed for want of proof, and the statutory additional percentage under the Land Acquisition Act was held inapplicable to this compensation scheme. The excess compensation, however, carried interest at 4% per annum.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the appeals and the right to claim compensation survived the expiry of the Defence of India Act, (ii) what was the fair market value of the acquired agricultural land and the tube-wells, and (iii) whether the claimants were entitled to additional amounts for severance, business loss and statutory increase in compensation.

Issue (i): Whether the appeals and the right to claim compensation survived the expiry of the Defence of India Act.

Analysis: The acquisition had been completed while the Act was in force, the claimants had already acquired a vested right to compensation on acquisition, and the proceedings for quantification had been instituted and carried forward under the statutory scheme. The expiry of a temporary enactment does not destroy completed transactions or vested rights, and the right of appeal provided by the compensation scheme was treated as part of that completed adjudicatory process. The compensation claim was therefore distinguishable from a prosecution for a new offence under an expired temporary law.

Conclusion: The preliminary objection failed and the appeals were maintainable.

Issue (ii): What was the fair market value of the acquired agricultural land and the tube-wells.

Analysis: The compensation had to be fixed on the basis of a willing seller and willing buyer standard, with the land's character, irrigation, revenue entries, cultivation history and prevailing agricultural conditions taken into account. The Court accepted that most of the land was to be treated as irrigated agricultural land, except the portion shown as banjar qadim, banjar jadid and ghair mumkin, and assessed the land at a rate substantially higher than that adopted by the Collector and lower than that claimed by the claimants. For the wells, the evidence supported the valuation adopted by the revenue authorities rather than the higher estimate put forward by the claimants.

Conclusion: The land value was fixed at Rs. 650 per acre, except 64 kanals 7 marlas at Rs. 125 per acre, and the wells were valued at Rs. 1,000 each.

Issue (iii): Whether the claimants were entitled to additional amounts for severance, business loss and statutory increase in compensation.

Analysis: No material loss by severance or business disruption was proved. The additional statutory percentage under the Land Acquisition Act was held inapplicable to the compensation scheme under the Defence of India Act, but equity justified payment of interest on the excess amount awarded over the Collector's offer.

Conclusion: The claims for severance, business loss and the additional statutory percentage were rejected, but interest at 4 per cent per annum on the excess amount was allowed.

Final Conclusion: The claimants obtained a substantial enhancement of compensation with interest, while the Government's appeals were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: A vested right to compensation arising from completed acquisition under a temporary statute survives the statute's expiry, and the compensation appeal process may continue to be adjudicated after expiry where the acquisition and compensatory rights had already accrued.

---