MANOHAR v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Discusses principles for determining fair compensation in land acquisition, including exemplar valuation and relevance of market value.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: 2025 INSC 900
Decision Date: 28-07-2025
List of Laws
Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961; Land Acquisition Act, 1894; General Principles of Law
- Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961: The judgment discusses the acquisition of land under the provisions of this Act for setting up an Industrial Area near Jintur town in Parbhani District (4.2, 14). Section 32(2) is mentioned in the context of the Land Acquisition Officer issuing a notice on 16th January, 1992 (4.3). The judgment refers to the date of notification under Section 32 of the Act of 1961 as the material date for determining the market value of the land (19, 41). The High Court considered sale instances near the notification under Section 32(2) of the Act of 1961 (50).
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 18 is mentioned in the context of the Appellants filing a Reference before the Reference Court, claiming enhancement of compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer (4.5, 14). Section 51A is discussed in relation to the presumptive value of certified copies of sale deeds placed on record by the claimants (20, 43). The Reference Court also awarded the statutory benefits available under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 including solatium (49). The judgment refers to Section 4 of the LA Act in the context of valuing the acquired land (40).
- General Principles of Law: The judgment extensively discusses the principle that when there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, the highest of the exemplars, if it is a bona fide transaction, should be considered (31, 32, 33, 46, 48). The judgment also discusses the principle of averaging sale prices, noting that it is permissible only when the prices have marginal variation (31, 35, 47, 48, 49). The judgment emphasizes that abnormally high or low value sales should be carefully discarded (35). The judgment also discusses the principle that compensation should be determined by reference to the price a seller might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser (40).
🔒 For Members Only