2

I have 14 marla (3150 sq. ft. or ~294 sq. m) of land in Tanda Urmur, in the Hoshiarpur district, connected to a road. This land is to be acquired by the government for widening the road. The market value of the land is rs. 100000. per marla. The government is paying rs. 80000. per marla as compensation.

Is it a right compensation? The land is situated in a rural area. I want to know what is the compensation of land situated in a rural area acquired by the government given to the landowner.

| improve this question | |
  • Welcome to stack exchange, and a good first question. As you are a new user, I would recommend that you take the tour, because the stack exchange network is different from other internet forums. With respect to your question, how was the market value of your land determined? Where I am from in the US, government evaluations for eminent domain purposes have a reputation for being low, partially because the government's evaluation methods differ from traditional ones. – sharur Oct 4 '18 at 18:02
1

The market value of the land is rs. 100000. per marla. The government is paying rs. 80000. per marla as compensation.

In theory, the government is supposed to pay the market value of the land and there is a legal process by which you can dispute the price that they offer.

But, the market value of land is not a matter that can be measured with absolute truth by means not reasonably subject to dispute in the way that you can its area or elevation or location. There is generally some room for reasonable people to disagree over what the market value of land really is, in practice.

So, if you are offered rs. 80000 per marla and you think it is really worth 100000, you have to decide if rs. 20000 per marla is worth the time and trouble to fight over, or whether the route of least resistance to simply accept the government offer is a better deal for you.

In addition to the time and trouble involved in the process, you also have to consider whether your evidence that your 14 marla is worth rs. 280,000, in the aggregate, more than the government is offering is solid enough that it would prevail in the legal process.

You need to consider how solid your evidence from an appraiser would be, how much it would cost you to get the appraiser's testimony, and how much time and effort the legal effort would cost you to make that decision.

In U.S. dollars, this is a fight over $3,640, give or take, based upon day to day variation in exchange rates. If I were you, I would not choose to fight the government over a dispute of this amount. But, ultimately, that is an economic and business decision for you to make.

| improve this answer | |
  • Note that $3,640 in US may have different value than the equivalent amount in India based on the comparative cost of living. – JAB Nov 3 '18 at 23:35
  • 1
    @JAB The relevant comparison is to the cost of a lawyer in India to litigate over that amount of money. And, while I note that this is an economic and business decision, given the cost of lawyers in India, I wouldn't do it, but maybe someone else would. – ohwilleke Nov 5 '18 at 15:14
-1

There is more to eminent domain than their making an offer. Ultimately fair value is what they say it is, but “they” isn’t limited just to the people talking to you now. Generally the idea is to make an offer that the owner will accept rather than fight. Only you can decide whether they have done that in this case.

If they haven’t, and the reason you don’t want to sell can be addressed by money, then the first thing to do is see if you can make a counter offer. If so, see if you can’t get to an agreeable price without involving the courts, lawyers or property appraisers, or law makers.

| improve this answer | |
  • It's not an offer, it's a statement. One may dispute the exact amount but unless the reasons for taking the land are illegitimate (and road expansion using bare land in a rural area almost definitely won't be overturned) the sale is going to happen. – Nij Nov 4 '18 at 0:34
  • @Nij: until you have run out of appeals, it’s an offer. And in the US at least, typically they will make an explicit offer before taking it to court, as it is easier to dicker a bit than it is to appear in court and risk loosing. If the OP thinks it’s worth an extra 280k, why shouldn’t the court agree? If that happens the government pays the extra AND the managers look bad AND other people will be encouraged to contest the price. – jmoreno Nov 4 '18 at 0:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.