Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(3) I would start with a more basic question what do we mean by value ? The best answer that I can find is in Wigmore on Evidence 'When the condto of others indicating the nature of a salable article consists in offering this or that sum of money, it creates the phenomena of value, so-called. For evidential purposes, Sale-Value is nothing more than the nature or quality of the article as measured by the money which others show themselves willing to lay out in purchasing it. Their offers of money not merely indicate the value ; they are the value; i.e. since value is merely a standard or measure in figures, those sums taken in net potential result are that standard.' (4) The vital proposition which emerges from this passage is that value is created by offers to buy. It does not depend on whether an article is actually sold or not. Of course, if the offer does blossom into a' sale its probative force is considerably enhanced, because thereby the value comes to be agreed upon by two persons who are otherwise in a state of opposition, and does not merely represent the view of one. Relating this to the subject in hand, in the inference follows that previous offers for, or sales of, the acquired land are relevant for determining its market value.

(5) But, more often than not, such evidence in respect of the very land acquired is not available; or, if it is, it turns out to be too remote in time. So, one is compelled to look for other indications of market value. Immediately the thought arises, can one take into account the value of other lands for this purpose ? The law of evidence gives a qualified answer, limited by its concept of remoteness. Again, I quote from Wigmore. At page 504 of the same value he says ' . . .the value or sale price of the other property is relevant only when the property is substantially similar in conditions'. The rational basis for this rule is expounded on page 419 as follows : 'THElogical assumption is that by a common cause or causes uniform effects have been produced over a given area, which is thenceforth related to the evidential place as a homogeneous whole to its parts. In practical application, therefore, the requirement is that the two places should be so related that in experience they probably form parts of a homogeneous area including them both ; and in such case the condition or quality of the one place is relevant to show the condition or quality of the other.' (6) In the United States of America a few courts have apparently taken the view that such evidence is 'irrelevant, improper, and dangerous'. However, on page 505 of the same volume, Wigmore answers their argument and says '....that since value is a money estimate of a marketable article possessing certain definiable qualities, the value of other marketable articles possessing substantially similar qualities is strongly evidential and is so treated in commercial life ; all the argument and protestation conceivable cannot alter the fact that the commercial world perceives and acts on this relevancy.' On the same page he closes with the observation : 'Except in a few jurisdictions, this class of evidence is received '.

(7) English Law adopts the same approach. Cripps on Compulsory Acquisition of Land (11th edition) says at page 690 ; "THEprices paid for comparable property in the neighborhood are the usual evidence as to the market value. In addition to the prices paid for similar land a bona fide offer for the land taken should be taken into consideration as evidence of the market value of the land ;. .......' The first sentence of this passage occurs verbatim in volume 8 of Halst Airy's Laws of England (4th edition) at page 211. For authority, both these books rely on Vyricheria Narayana Gajapatiraju v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizagapatam, Air 1939 Privy Council 98(1), where Lord Romar said : In the case of land, its value in general can also be measured by a consideration of the prices that have been obtained in the past for land of similar quality and in similar positions, and this is what must be meant in general by "the market value" in section 23.' (8) Now, what is the position under the Indian Evidence Act. 1872? Section 5 makes it clear that only those facts are relevant which fall within one of the succeeding sections of that Act. To my mind the provision directly and properly applicable to the category of facts under consideration, is that part of section 9 which declares to be relevant facts 'which support or rebut an inference suggesed by a fact in issue or relevant fact'. In a proceeding to determine the compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act, the fact in issue is the value of the acquired land. Recalling Wigmore's theory of a 'homogeneous area', it follows, that the values of similar lands in the vicinity of the acquired land will 'support or rebut' assertions as to its value by either party to the proceeding. Therefore, the values of other lands in the neighborhood are relevant under section 9.

(20) Elsewhere, in his judgment, after pointing out that an award by a Collector is 'a mere offer', Shelat, J., says 'an offer is at best! opinion evidence', and, therefore, not admissible 'unless the person making the offer gives evidence about if. Here, again, I must respectfully demur. The distinction between fact and opinion is extremely fine. Wigmore criticises it as a 'useless refinement of logic' : see Volume 7 page 26. However, be record-:, in the same volume at page 50, that In all jurisdictions testimony to the value of a specific piece of property is now received, as not obnoxious to the Opinion rule'. An offer, may be the outward manifestation of an opinion : yet, it is a fact which 'creates the phenomena of value'. Dealing with borderline cases between fact and opinion. Cross in his book on Evidence (3rd ed.) says at page 360, that witnesses are permitted to state their opinion 'with regard to matters not calling for special knowledge whenever it would be virtually impossible for them to separate. their inferences from the facts on which those inferences are based'. An offer, I should have thought was. at least, such a case.