The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of just and fair compensation for acquired land, considering the location and value of the land, and the legal principles of burden of proof, balance of probability, and the court's role as an original court in land acquisition cases.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Kumar Dhand, J. - Both the misc. appeals arise out of the common judgment and award, hence the same are being decided together.

2. Both the misc. appeals have been filed by the appellants claimants (for short 'the appellants') under Section 54 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 against the order dated 24.07.1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jaipur District, Jaipur in reference case No. 1/87 whereby the reference of the claimants was accepted and the amount of compensation was enhanced.

3. Facts of this case in brief are that a Notification under Section 4(1) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1953 came to be issued on 30.04.1985 inter alia for acquisition of the land measuring 207 bigha and 17 biswa situtated at Village Damodarpura, Bhankri including the land of the Khatedar-Girdhari Lal. Thereafter, a survey report was summoned from the Tehsildar Bassi and subsequently a notification under Section 6 and 17(4) of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition, Act of 1953 was issued and the possession of the land was taken.

4. After acquisition of the land, the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 17.03.1986 and determined the compensation of Rs. 10,000/- per bigha for chahi land (irrigated land) and Rs. 9000/- per bigha for barani land (non-irrigated land). The appellant-Gyarsi Lal was not satisfied with the amount so determined by the Land Acquisition Officer, hence, he submitted a Reference under Section 18 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act of 1953 before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jaipur District, Jaipur (for short 'the Civil Court'). The said reference was partly allowed by the Civil Court vide judgment dated 24.07.1999 after hearing the arguments of both sides and it was held that the appellants would be entitled to get compensation @ of Rs. 15,000/- per bigha for 'chahi land' (irrigated land) and Rs. 14,000/- for 'barani land' (non-irrigated land) and apart from the above compensation for the trees was also ordered to be given and a cost of Rs. 2000/- was imposed upon the respondents.

5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the reference order dated 24.07.1999, passed by the Civil Court, the instant appeals have been preferred by the Khatedar as well as by the National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (for short, 'NTPC'). Counsel for the appellant-Gyarsi Lal submits that while deciding the similar reference, the learned Civil Court with regard to adjacent land observed that the Collector has determined the value of similarly situated land at Tonk Road as Rs. 25,000/- per bigha, so in the instant case also the compensation should have been awarded to the appellants @ of Rs. 25,000/- per bigha. Counsel submits that though the learned Civil Court determined the market value of the 'chahi land' (irrigated land) as Rs. 13,000/- per bigha and Rs. 12,000/- per bigha for 'barani land' (non-irrigated land). Counsel submits that the land of the appellants was situated at Damodarpura which is more precious and valuable to the land similarly situated at Tonk Road, so the matters require reconsideration by this Court and amount of award be enhanced accordingly.

6. Per contra, counsel for the NTPC opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the appellants and submits that with regard to the adjacent land near the land of the appellant-Gyarsi Lal, a reference has been decided by the learned Civil Court and while deciding the said reference the market value of the adjacent land has been determined as Rs. 13,000/- per bigha for 'chahi land' (irrigated land) and Rs. 12,000/- per bigha for 'barani land' (non-irrigated land). Thus, the impugned order passed by the Civil Court is liable to be quashed and an order be passed for reducing the amount of compensation. Counsel submits that similar reference order dated 03.12.1999 passed in the civil case was challenged by the NTPC before this Court by way of filing civil Misc. Appeal No. 1512/2000 and the same was dismissed on 26.09.2