Authority: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Order Date: 15 October 2026 (reserved on 22 July 2026)

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant – S. N. Desai Hospitalities & Developers LLP (claimant); Respondents – Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No.7, Mumbai and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM). Two appeals were pending: FA‑268/2021 (claimant vs. Deputy Collector) and FA‑541/2021 (MCGM vs. claimant).
  • Background: Acquisition of land reserved for garden, recreation ground and a 27.45‑m DP road under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act). Original award dated 03‑05‑2017 fixed compensation at ₹5,11,48,81,199. The claimant sought enhancement under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 2013); MCGM opposed the enhancement and argued the LARR Authority lacked jurisdiction.
  • Key procedural dates: 01‑07‑2011 notice under MRTP Act; 19‑06‑2012 State notification (deemed Section 6 LA Act declaration); 15‑10‑2012 LA Act notices; 01‑01‑2014 Act 2013 came into force; 27‑08‑2014 Rules of 2014 (Rule 19(3)) enacted; 03‑05‑2017 original award; 12‑06‑2017 reference application; 10‑01‑2018 reference filed; 10‑01‑2019 Single Judge transferred reference to LARR Authority, Nagpur; 30‑03‑2021 LARR Authority enhanced compensation to ₹15,91,12,24,012.30 (total payable ₹21,01,20,23,522.30).
  • Points for determination (seven): jurisdiction of LARR Authority, maintainability of reference under Section 64 vs. Section 18 LA Act, appropriate valuation method (Ready Reckoner vs. Sale Instances), applicability of residual land‑value technique, justification of enhancement, need for interference, final quantum of compensation.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held that the LARR Authority had proper jurisdiction; the reference under Section 64 of the Act 2013 was maintainable; MCGM’s contention of nullity was rejected.
  • Valuation: The Court accepted the ready‑reckoner method (Section 26(1)(a)) and rejected the sale‑instances method due to lack of admissible sale deeds within the prescribed three‑year window.
  • Ready‑reckoner rates: Village Ambivali – ₹72,100/sq m (zone 47/231A); Village Oshiwara – ₹90,600/sq m (zone 50/240A). Weighted‑average rate calculated as ₹72,817/sq m for the total 48,897.60 sq m.
  • Additions: TDR +40%; Fungible FSI +25.2% (court corrected LARR’s 28% to 25.2%); Largeness of land +25%.
  • Deductions: DCR 35(1) ‑15%; DCR 27 (amenity space) ‑5%; no further 15% deduction for loss of FSI or 10% for hillock was allowed.
  • Other components: Expenses for compound wall and storm‑water drains retained; 100% solatium under Section 30(1) applied; interest component of 12% for 1,780 days calculated.
  • Revised compensation table (amounts in rupees):

1. Rate per sq m (weighted) – ₹72,817

2. Base market value – ₹356,05,76,539.20

3. DCR 35(1) deduction – ‑₹53,40,86,480.88

4. DCR 27 deduction – ‑₹17,80,28,826.96

5. TDR addition – +₹142,42,30,615.68

6. Fungible FSI addition – +₹89,72,65,287.88

7. Largeness addition – +₹89,01,44,134.80

8. Compound‑wall & drains – ₹2,06,72,012.00

9. Total market value – ₹608,07,73,281.72

10. 100% solatium – ₹608,07,73,281.72

11. 12% interest (1,780 days) – ₹355,85,01,843.79

12. Total compensation – ₹1,572,00,48,407.23

13. Amount already paid – ₹510,07,99,510.00

14. Enhanced compensation payable – ₹1,061,92,48,897.23

  • The Court modified the LARR award accordingly, directing MCGM to pay the balance of ₹1,061,92,48,897.23 within 12 weeks, with interest at 9% p.a. for the first year from possession and 15% p.a. thereafter until full realisation.
  • The Court dismissed MCGM’s appeal, upheld the claimant’s appeal, and disposed of pending applications.
  • Stay: The Court noted MCGM’s request for a 12‑week stay but instead granted a 12‑week period to make payment.

Topics: Land Acquisition, Compensation Valuation