Back
2008 Supreme(Pat) 176
PATNA HIGH COURT
Sheema Ali Khan, J.
Mithilesh Prasad Singh
Versus
State Of Bihar Through The Collector
Appeal From Original Decree No. 255 of 1980 ;
Decided On : JANUARY 25, 2008
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of just and fair compensation for acquired land, the entitlement to enhanced solatium and interest under the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Compensation - Section 231-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 - Section 23(1), 23(2), and 28 of the Act
Fact of the Case:
The appellants challenged the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Judge for the acquisition of their land for the construction of an Industrial Training Institute. They argued that the compensation was below the market value and relied on sale deeds and evidence to support their claim.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the compensation awarded was unjustified and increased the compensation for the land and trees based on the evidence presented by the appellants. The Court also ruled on the applicability of enhanced solatium and interest under the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984.
Issues: The issues involved the adequacy of compensation for the acquired land and trees, and the entitlement to enhanced solatium and interest under the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Judge was unjustified and increased the compensation based on the evidence presented by the appellants. The Court also ruled that the appellants were entitled to 15% solatium on the market value of the land and directed the respondents to pay interest on excess compensation at the rate of 6% per annum.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the award granted by the Collector and the order passed in the Land Acquisition Case were set aside.
Sheema Ali Khan, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the Land holders challenging the order of the Special Land Acquisition Judge, Chapra which passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 60 of 1970 passed on 29.1.1980.
2. The Collector, Chapra had fixed the compensation for the land of the appellants at Rs. 9670.59. He further awarded at Rs. 1608.00 for the trees standing on the land and at Rs. 1391.79 as additional compensation.
3. The two issues which arise in this case are firstly whether the compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Judge is proper or whether there should be an increase in the amount of compensation granted by the Court below? The second question that it has been raised in this appeal is whether the appellants are entitled to 12% on the market value of the land as per Section 231-A of the Land Acquisition Act and 30% of solatium as per the amendment introduced by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 1984.
4. The land which has been acquired as been described as follows: Nature of LandAcresDecimalsConverted into Katha & Dhoor Bhith2317018 Orchard1384118 Parti 481507 Gadha 220615 Total Land48913412
5. The purpose for which the Land is acquired described under Section 6(1) of the Act as follows: Acquisition of Land for the construction of Industrial Training Institute, Marhowarah in the District of Saran
6. It may noted that the very purpose for which the land is acquired indicates the value and nature of land, which will be substantiated by evidence and documents as I proceed with this judgment.
7. In order to substantiate their case the appellants submit that the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Judge is below the market value. The appellants have relied on Exhibit-1 and Exhibit-2 as well as on the evidence led by the appellants in the Court below to bring home their submissions.
8. Exhibit-1 is the sale deed dated 5.6.1967 by which an area of 7 Dhur of land have been sold at Rs. 700/-. Calculating the cost of land as per Exhibit-1 it would amount to Rs. 2000/- per Katha. Exhibit- 2 is the sale deed dated 18.10.1967 with respect to 1 Katha 25 dhoors which has been sold for a sum of Rs. 1500/-. Apart from these documents the appellants have also pleaded at paragraph No. 5 of their application before the Land Acquisition Judge at Chapra that the market selling rate of the lands in the area which have been notified for acquisition is not less than Rs. 1500/- per Katha. It is further claimed that the price of one Mango tree is Rs. 400/- each and the price of other trees is Rs. 200/- each. The total amount claimed by the appellants is approximately Rs. 1,77,000/-besides cost of the trees which are on the acquired land.
9. Learned court below has rejected the Exhibit-1 on the ground that the land described in the sale deed shows that it is homestead land and not similar to the lands of which have been acquired. Exhibit-2 has similarly been rejected, on the ground that it is sale deed which is executed six months prior to the notification of the acquisition and as such it cannot form the basis of fixing the quantum of compensation.
10. The reasoning of the Court below for rejecting the sale deeds is not at all justified. While deciding the market value of the lands the relevant factors which have evolved by way of case laws on the subject are suitability of the land, the area of the land, the size and shape of the lands, and the Access and frontage of the lands sought to be acquired.
11. It is true that the sale deed Exhibit-I is as with respect to the homestead land, however, it is equally true that the Government has found the acquired lands fit for construction of building for the purpose of opening a Training Institute. Therefore, it cannot be said that the lands acquired and the lands of Exhibits-I and II (Sale deeds) are dissimilar. It has been vehemently argued that part of the acquired lands are Bhith land and Gadha, and as such, their value would be less than the Parti land and Orchard. Pa
