Ready Reckoner Rates Meant For Calculation Of Stamp Duty Cannot Be The Basis For Determination Of Land Acquisition Compensation

Case: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs Nemichand Damodardas

Coram: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna

Case No.: CA 3478 OF 2022

Court Observation: “We are in complete agreement with the view taken in the aforesaid two decisions that the prices mentioned in the Ready Reckoner for the purpose of calculation of the stamp duty, which are fixed for the entire area, cannot be the basis for determination of the compensation under the Land Acquisition Act”

“Thus, there may be various factors, which are required to be considered for determining the market value of the land. The market value of the land depends upon the location of the land; area of the land; whether the land is in a developed area or not; whether the acquisition is of a small plot of land or a big chunk of land and number of other advantageous and disadvantageous factors are required to be considered. Therefore, there cannot be the same market value for the different lands while determining the compensation for the lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, the rates mentioned in the Ready Reckoner, which are basically for the purpose of collection of stamp duty and as observed hereinabove, which are the uniform rates for all the lands in the area, cannot be the basis for determination of the compensation for the lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act.”

Previous Posts

(Matrimonial Offences) Burden Lies Upon Prosecution To Prove First Marriage & Legality Of Second Marriage: MP High Court

Provision Enabling Employee To Get Higher Gratuity Prevails Over One That Limits The Gratuity Amount: Kerala High Court

If Party Seeking Possession Of Immovable Property Is Aware About Sale In Favour Of A Third Party, It Must Implead The Latter As An Objector: Delhi HC

If Tender Conditions/ Award Of Contract Is In Public Interest, Court Can’t Interfere Even If Procedural Aberration/ Error In Assessment Made Out: Delhi HC

Can’t Interfere With Discretionary Order Condoning Delay In Supervisory Jurisdiction U/Art 227 Unless There Is Total Non-Application Of Mind: Delhi HC

Anticipatory Bail Plea Not Maintainable By Person Already Enlarged On Bail As He Is Under Constructive Custody: J&K&L High Court

Section 27 Evidence Act- Discovery Of Weapon At The Instance Of Accused By Itself Does Not Prove That He Had Concealed Or Used It: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Explains Scope Of Judicial Review Of Administrative Action Based On Subjective Opinion/Satisfaction Of Authority

Supreme Court Remands Appeal In 1964 Suit To High Court For Fresh Decision After 16 Years

GST – Provisional Attachment Power ‘Draconian’; Not Intended To Authorize Commissioners To Make Preemptive Strikes On Assessee’s Property Download Judgement