HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
P. CHATTERJEE, T. P. MUKHERJI
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Appellant
Versus
BHUTNATH CHATTERJEE - Respondent
Civil Revn. 2186 Of 1963
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 23, 1964
LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 - SECTION 4(1) - SECTION 23(1) - NOTIFICATION - MARKET VALUE - ASSESSMENT - DATE OF NOTIFICATION - VALIDITY - SUBSEQUENT NOTIFICATIONS - EFFECT.
Fact of the Case:
Two notifications were issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the acquisition of land for the development of industries in the Durgapur area. The first notification was issued on January 12, 1955, and the second notification was issued on November 12, 1956. The Land Acquisition Judge held that the date of the later notification would be the date with reference to which the market value should be assessed in the two cases concerned.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the first notification dated January 12, 1955, was a valid notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and that the assessment of market value should be made with reference thereto. The court found that the subsequent notifications were merely supplementary to the earlier notification and did not have the effect of cancelling it.
Issues: 1. Whether the first notification dated January 12, 1955, was a valid notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894? 2. Whether the subsequent notifications issued on November 12, 1956, and June 3, 1958, had the effect of cancelling the earlier notification?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the first notification dated January 12, 1955, was a valid notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as it specified the 'locality' within which land was proposed to be acquired and complied with the requirements of the Act. 2. The court held that the subsequent notifications issued on November 12, 1956, and June 3, 1958, were merely supplementary to the earlier notification and did not have the effect of cancelling it, as they were issued to provide additional information and to comply with the requirements of Section 5a of the Act.
Final Decision: The High Court made the Rules absolute and set aside the order of the Land Acquisition Judge. The court directed the Land Acquisition Judge to decide the case in accordance with law in the light of the court's finding.
( 1 ) THE two Rules issued at the instance of the State of West Bengal are directed against an order of the Judge at Asansol whereby in deciding the question as to which of the two notices issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 would govern the determination of market value of the acquired lands under S. 23 (1) of the Act, he came to the finding that the date of the later notification would be the date with reference to which the market value should be assessed in the two cases concerned.
( 2 ) L. A. Reference Cases 121 of 1961 and 221 of 1961 were started on the prayer of the claimant--O. P. in the court of the Judge at Burdwan. The claimant moved the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and obtained an order directing the judge to investigate the question as to which of the two notifications under Section 4 (1) of the said Act would prevail for the purpose of determination of the market price of the acquired lands in the cases concerned. The learned judge thereafter took up the question as a preliminary issue in the two cases, and arrived at the finding that the later notification had the effect of superseding the earlier one. This he did on the strength of the case, State of Madras v. Balaji Chettiar. It is the correctness of this finding that is challenged by the learned Government pleader who contends that the trial judge acted illegally and with material irregularity in exercise of his jurisdiction in the matter.
( 3 ) IT appears from the record that on January 12, 1955 the State Government issued a notification under Section 4 of the said Act in connection with the proposed acquisition of land for the development of industries in the Durgapur area in the District of Burdwan and authorised a survey within an area described by boundaries mentioned in the notification.
( 4 ) ON November 12, 1956 another notification under Section 4 of the Act was published and this notification specified by C. S. Plot Nos. certain lands which were proposed to be acquired and it further stated that a plan of the land may be inspected in the office of the Administrator Durgapur Project as well as in that of the Collector of Burdwan, The notification stated that the provisions of Section 5a of the Act shall not apply to the waste or arable lauds out of those mentioned therein and this was done by virtue of the power vested in the State Government under Section 17 (4) of the Act. Objection was invited to the acquisition of such lands covered by the notification as were not waste or arable. A similar notification in respect of certain other lands was published on June 3, 1958.
( 5 ) MR. Chakravarti, appearing on behalf of the State of West Bengal urged that the question of priority between two notices under Section 4 of the Act did not come up for decision in the Madras case relied on by the learned judge below and that anything stated in that judgment on such a question is in the nature of obiter and would be no authority for the purpose for which it was accepted by the trial Judge, it would appeal from the reported decision in the case above that only one notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was issued in that case and as such the observation therein that where there are successive notices under Section 4, the date of the last notice is the date with reference to which the market value has to be fixed, is merely an expression of opinion without any consideration of the necessary material aspects of the matter. The observation above was sought to be buttressed by a Privy Council decision in Ma Sin v. Collector of Rangoon, AIR 1929 PC 126 and that in Akilandammal v. Special Deputy Collector, Vm. T. Railway, Trichinopoly, 1932 Mad WN 853. In the Privy Council case above a declaration under Section 6 L. A. Act was published on May 31, 1923 in respect of certain lands of the appellant and certain other lands belonging to other people. On October 6, 1923 a further declaration und
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.