The court established that compensation for land acquisition must be based on market value evidenced by comparable sales, and interest must be calculated per statutory provisions.

Order :

(Parth Prateem Sahu, J.)

Heard.

1. This appeal is filed by the appellants challenging the legality and sustainability of the Award dated 27.07.2009 passed in Miscellaneous Civil Suit No.5/2008 by learned Additional District Judge, Sakti, District -Janjgir Champa whereby learned Reference Court has partly allowed the Application for Reference filed under Section 18 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter referred to as “the Act of 1894”).

2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that the appellants are owner of the land bearing kh. No.84 area 1 acre, kh. no.85 area 0.05 acres, kh. No.73 area 0.25 acres, kh. no.42 area 0.03 acre, kh. No.256 area 0.10 acre and kh. No.292 area 0.01 acres, situated at Village Sakhrali, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir- Champa. Aforementioned land was acquired by respondent-State for purpose of construction of irrigation canal. As per pleadings made in the application under Section 18 (2) of the Act of 1894, possession of the land owned by the appellants were taken by the respondent prior to initiating the acquisition proceedings and pursuant to taking of possession, work of construction of canal was also started. Notification under Section 4 of the Act of 1894 was published on 19.03.2004 and after following due procedure as provided under the Act of 1894, Award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 19.10.2006 calculating the amount of compensation with respect to land owned by the appellants based on the market value as provided under the guidelines prepared by the Registrar, District- Janjgir Champa valuing the land at the rate of Rs.1,82,400.00/- per hectare / Rs.73,846.15/- (in round off Rs.73,846.00/-) per acre. In the Award, apart from the amount of compensation of land, amount towards solatium of 30%, interest is also awarded at the rate of 12% per annum from 19.03.2004 till 19.10.2006.

3. Aggrieved by the amount of compensation as calculated by the Land Acquisition Officer and the award of interest not from the date of taking over possession but from the date of notification, appellants submitted application under Section 18 (2) of the Act of 1894 before the Collector seeking reference of the Award. The Collector has allowed the application and referred the case to the Addl. District Judge, based upon which, Miscellaneous Civil Suit No.5/2008 was registered and accordingly, proceedings was initiated. After hearing both the sides, learned Addl. District Judge has passed the impugned Award, partly allowing the application filed under Section 18 (2) of the Act of 1894.

4. Learned Addl. District Judge has formulated as many as eight issues for consideration and based upon evidence brought on record by the respective parties has concluded that the possession of the land owned by the appellants have been taken by the respondent in the month of April 2002, awarded interest at the rate of 12 % per annum from 2^nd April 2002 till 19.10.2006 and thereafter interest at the rate of 15 % per annum till deposit of amount of compensation so awarded.

5. Learned Addl. District Judge has further assessed the value of land at the rate of Rs.1,70,500/- per hectare for calculating the amount of compensation to be awarded to the appellants based on Ex.A-9 which is the guidelines of market value of land prepared by the Registrar, District Janjgir Champa .

6. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the finding recorded by the learned Addl. District Judge with respect to value of the land at the rate of Rs.1,70,500/- per hectare is erroneous on face of award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Land Acquisition Officer has assessed the value of land at the rate of Rs.2,77,135/- per hectare after considering the sale transactions placed before it and taking average value of sale deeds as produced before. However, the Land Acquisition Officer erred in taking into consideration only the guidelines prepared by the Registrar, Janjgir Champa and not the present market value as on th