Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Bhuvaneshwar Prasad, J.
Kameshwar Prasad Verma
Versus
State Of Bihar
Appeal from Original Decree No. 526 of 1986 ;
Decided On : MARCH 17, 1989
LAND ACQUISITION - COMPENSATION - SOLATIUM - INTEREST - AMENDMENT ACT 1984 - APPLICABILITY - PENDING PROCEEDINGS - Bhag Singh V/s. Union Territory of Chandigarh - Smt. Nikhleshwari Choudhary V/s. The State of Bihar - Mahabir Prasad Santuka V/s. Collector, Cuttack and Ors. - State of Bihar V/s. Dwarikanath Jha - Sec.23(2) and Sec.28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sec.30(2) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 - Sec.23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sec.12 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sec.18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Fact of the Case:
Appellant challenged the award of compensation for the acquisition of his land, claiming inadequate compensation, additional solarium, and interest. The Special Land Acquisition Judge awarded compensation with a 15% solarium and no interest.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, which increased the solarium to 30% and interest to 9%, applied to pending proceedings, including the appellant's case. The court also held that the appellant was entitled to interest from the date of notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act and 12% per annum on the market value of the land as per Sec.23(1-A) of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, applied to pending proceedings. 2. Whether the appellant was entitled to a 30% solarium and 9% interest. 3. Whether the appellant was entitled to interest from the date of notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act. 4. Whether the appellant was entitled to 12% per annum on the market value of the land as per Sec.23(1-A) of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on Bhag Singh V/s. Union Territory of Chandigarh, which held that the amended provisions of Sec.23(2) and Sec.28 of the Act applied to all pending proceedings, including those before the Collector, Court, High Court, or Supreme Court. 2. The court held that the appellant was entitled to a 30% solarium and 9% interest as per the amended provisions of Sec.23(2) and Sec.28 of the Act. 3. The court held that the appellant was entitled to interest from the date of notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act, as the State had come into possession of the acquired land from that date. 4. The court held that the appellant was entitled to 12% per annum on the market value of the land as per Sec.23(1-A) of the Act.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the appellant was awarded a 30% solarium, 9% interest from the date of notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act, and 12% per annum on the market value of the land as per Sec.23(1-A) of the Act.
Bhuvaneshwar Prasad, J.
1. This appeal, by the sole appellant, is directed against the judgment dated 11-7-1986 and decree dated 30-7-1986 passed in LAR Case No. 4 of 1982 by Stiri Sankatha Prasad, Special Land Acquisition Judge-cum-Sub-Judge, Siwan.
2. It appears that the State of Bihar acquired 16 decimals of land equivalent to 4 Kathas 6 dhurs in Plot No. 1233 under Khata No. 78 situated at village Mnrklioo under P.S. Hussainganj for Ganduk Project for a sum of Rs. 1079 84 which was awarded as compensation as per the award prepared under Sec.12 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short the Act). This award was made in favor of the present appellant who happened to be the owner of the land acquired. The appellant filed an objection against this award on the ground that the amount of compensation awarded to him was very low and inadequate. It was his submission that the laud under acquisition was a very fertile piece of land which got irrigational facilities and which produced three crops in one year. He claimed that the valuation of the acquired land was Rs. 3,000.00 per katha at rate prevailing for the neighboring land. The appellant did not accept the award and prayed that the matter may be referred to the Special Land Acquisition Judge under Sec.18 of the Act. It appears that after filing this objection the appellant informed the court that he had received the amount of compensation under protest. He, however, alleged that about 6 Kathas of land of Plot No. 1233 out of the remaining portion of this plot was also cut and damaged for embankment of canal and was rendered useless. For this land he claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 3,000.00 per Katha.
3. The State of Bihar contested these claims of the appellant. It was submitted that the amount of compensation was assessed on the basis of the sale deeds for the adjoining land in the village during the period from 1-3-1978 to 1-3-1979. It was further submitted that the valuation so fixed was neither illegal nor low nor inadequate. Only two crops are grown over the land.
4. The matter came up before the learned Special Land Acquisition Judge who determined the amount of compensation at the rate of Rs. 2666/- per Katha along with additional 15% of the amount arrived at the calculation in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition. The award of the Collector was modified accordingly. Thus as per this judgment of the learned Special Land Acquisition Judge the market value of the acquired land was assessed at Rs. 14,463.80 paise and the amount of solarium at the rate of 15 per cent was assessed at Rs 1,714/- and no interest was awarded to the appellant.
5. In this appeal the appellant has contended that the learned Special Land Acquisition Judge should have awarded solarium at the rate of 30 per cent on the market value in view of the provisions of Sec.23(2) of the Act as amended by Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 and if calculated at this rate the amount of solarium would come to Rs. 4,339/-. The appellant further claimed a sum of Rs. 2625/- as interest at the rate of 9 per cent. It was contended that the learned Special Land Acquisition Judge has wrongly awarded solarium at the rate of 15 per cent which is not according to law. On these grounds it was contended that the appeal be allowed and the amount claimed by the appellant by way of solarium as also by way of interest be allowed to him.
6. Additional grounds were also made out by filing another application by the appellant. In this application, which appears to have been received in court on 11-2-1988, it was claimed that the learned Special Land Acquisition Judge has failed to award interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum on the entire amount of compensation including the solarium and other amounts as contemplated under the provisions of Sec.23 of the Act right from the date of publication of the Notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act till the final payment was made. The learned lo
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
