TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1956 (9) TMI 66
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was entitled to get compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,88,000 along with 15 per cent, for compulsory acquisition under Section 3(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, as well as damages to the extent of Rs. 350 per mensem resulting from the diminution of profits from 17-6-1947, i.e., the date of publication of declaration, under Section 6, till the date of taking over possession of the property, viz. 6th September 1947. Not being satisfied with the award, at the instance of the claimant a reference was made to the District Judge of Lucknow under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and the learned District Judge, after an exhaustive consideration of the various points arising, came to the conclusion that as the net saleable area came to 4,09,952 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... because the High Court has erred in rejecting the principle of belting. It is also argued that in fixing the value of the land, the High Court has failed to take into consideration the fact that the land falls outside the Municipal area and does not enjoy the amenities of water Supply, electricity, conservancy and transport which are enjoyed by lands within the Municipal area. It is further argued that the claimant had purchased the property as late as September, 1941, for a sum of Rs. 72,000 and, therefore, hardly five years had elapsed since that date before the notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was made. 5. Apart from stating that the decision of the High Court is incorrect, there is nothing positive in the gro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in Government securities. 6. Mr. S. P. Sinha has not been able to persuade us that the compensation allowed by the High Court differing from the view expressed by the District Judge that the criterion for valuation should be on the basis of blocks, is unsound and unacceptable. The High Court has given valid and weighty reasons for adopting that the valuation should be on plot rate though there are certain advantages in computing the value at the block rate where vast area of land is acquired. In the present case as the learned District Judge has observed, the layout, according to the plan Exhibit 52, enables the claimant to get better value for the land than if the same had been disposed of without subdivision and dissection. We feel t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 1-10-6, and in the other it was Rs. 1-13-0 per square foot. The plan attached to Exhibit 138 shows the alignment of property where plots designated as 18, 21, 22, 26 and 27 fetched Rs. 1-10-0 per square foot, whereas other plots fetched Rs. 1-13-0 per square foot. The learned counsel further argued that on the evidence of P. W. 1 it is clear that the land in dispute is worth between Rs. 2-3-0 and Rs. 2-8,0 per square foot. Various portions of the deposition of P. W. 1 were read out by the learned counsel. The claimant himself examined as P. W. 8 asserted that in April, 1947, the value of the land was Rs. 2-8-0 to Rs. 3 per square foot on the basis of demand and supply. In cross-examination he stated that small plots are sold at higher ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....adopted is plotwise, we do not find any justification in the learned Judges of the High Court falling back upon the method of block-wise sale, especially when we see from the evidence that there is no doubt whatever that there are willing, if not anxious, purchasers for all the plots delineated in Exhibit 52. The application of the principle that if the land has to be sold in one block consisting of a large area, the rate per square foot likely to be fetched would be smaller than if an equal extent of land is parcelled out into smaller bits and sold to different purchasers, cannot be reasonably applied to the circumstances in the present case. The High Court should have, in our view concentrated its attention on the price fetched for smalle....