TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1948 (4) TMI 13
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the second ward of the Kumbakonam municipality. The Land Acquisition Officer valued the site separately at Rs. 2236-4-0 calculating at the rate of five annas per sq. ft. He valued the house, compound wall, latrine and two wells at Rs. 1041 and the trees at Rs. 132-8-0. On the aggregate of Rs. 3409-12-0 he allowed the statutory allowance of 15 per cent, and awarded a total compensation of Rs. 3921-3-5. The learned Subordinate Judge confirmed the award in toto. 2. In appeal it is conceded on behalf of the appellant that the proper method of valuation to be adopted in a case like the present relating to house and ground situated in a municipality and fetching regular income is to asseess the value on the basis of capitalisation of the n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....figure thus arrived must of course be added 15 per cent. for compulsory acquisition. Applying these principles, having regard to 'the rate of interest on gilt-edged securities at the time of the notification which was 3½ per cent the learned Judge arrived at 30 years' purchase. The other learned Judge, Venkatasubba Rao, J., agreed with Newsam, J. He observed as follows: The return from landed property, generally speaking, reflects the prevalent rate of interest on money investments.... In the present cases, the relevant notifications were published towards the end of 1933 and the beginning of 1934. The Government of India loan at that time took the form of a three and a half per cent, issue liable to income tax.... When th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....milar to the property concerned in this appeal which is also a site with building. In the Sub-Collector, Rajahmundry v. Parthasarathi (1942) 2 M.L.J. 512 : I.L.R. (1943) Mad. 127 the property acquired was a site of 648 sq.ft. in the town of Rajahmundry. The learned Judges adopted the basis of the capitalisation of the net annual rental value. The lower Court in that case had adopted 12 years' purchase whereas the claimant wanted the calculation to be made upon 30 years' purchase. The learned Judge, Krishna-swami Aiyangar, J., who delivered the judgment of the Bench, after observing that the number of years' purchase which should be adopted in a given case must vary with individual cases and will have to be decided upon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issent from them. In Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichinopoly v. Varadachari (1944) 1 M.L.J. 142 the subject matter of the of the acquisition was ryotwari land. Horwill, J., who delivered the judgment Bench dealt with the two decisions in The Collector of Kistna v. Zamindar of Challapalli (1937) 2 M.L.J. 744 : I.L.R. (1938) Mad.431 and Land Acquisition Officer, Calicut v. Subba Rao (1941) 2 M.L.J. 75. Referring to the latter decision, the learned Judge said as follows: In Land Acquisition Officer, Calicut, v. Subba Rao (1941) 2 M.L.J. 75 the learned Judges, as already stated, were considering the value of a site in Calicut. It is not necessary for us to express any view on this departure from past pract....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e annual rental value on the basis of 13 years' purchase. After referring to the case in the Sub-Collector, Rajahmundry v. Parthasarathi (1942) 2 M.L.J. 512 : I.L.R. (1943) Mad. 127 the learned Judges say that twenty years' purchase would be the proper basis for the assessment of the value. There is no discussion of any principle nor does it appear that there was any contention that the number of years for capitalisation should be fixed with reference to the yield of Government securities. In Bibi Rukia v. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mangalore Appeal 289 of 1941 Krishnaswami Aiyangar and Somayya, JJ., arrived at the basis of 20 years' purchase but why they did so is made clear from the following words: As things....