Back
2005 Supreme(J&K) 235
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.
Power Grid Corp. Of India - Appellant
Versus
Lassi & Ors. - Respondent
CIA No. 14/2001
Decided On : 12 August, 2005
Advocate For Appellant: J.A. Kawoosa
Advocate For Respondent: S.T. Hussain
The main legal point established is the court's duty to make a fresh decision as directed by the Apex Court, disregarding previous findings, and the claimants' burden to prove inadequacy of compensation.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition Act - Acquisition of Land for Construction of Sub Station - Section 18 - 4, 6, 7, 11 - Summary: The judgment governs 12 Civil Ist Misc. Appeals arising from a common judgment passed by the Additional District Judge, Srinagar under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The case involves disputes over compensation for land acquisition for a substation. The court's decision was influenced by the Apex Court's direction to consider evidence and make a fresh decision, disregarding previous findings.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves disputes over compensation for land acquisition for a substation. The Collector awarded compensation, which was disputed by the respondents, leading to references to the District Judge. The 2nd Additional District Judge initially decided in favor of the respondents, but the decision was set aside by the Apex Court, directing a fresh decision after considering evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the previous judgments and findings were not to be considered, as per the Apex Court's direction to make a fresh decision. The respondents failed to prove the inadequacy of compensation, and the court decided in favor of the appellant, dismissing all references.
Issues: The issues involved the adequacy of compensation for land acquisition, the influence of previous judgments, and the burden of proof on the claimants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court was influenced by the Apex Court's direction to make a fresh decision, disregarding previous findings. It emphasized the claimants' burden to prove inadequacy of compensation and the duty of the court to protect public interests.
Final Decision: All the appeals were accepted, the impugned judgment was set aside, and all the references were dismissed.
2. It is necessary to give a flask back of the case, the womb of which has given birth to the present appeals, in order to appreciate the points involved in these appeals.
3. It appears that the Chief Engineer, Transmission NHPC Limited, Udhampur, Jammu had made a request, vide letter dated 2nd July, 1986, for the acquisition of the land for construction of 4000/220 KV Sub Station at Village Chattergam, Pahroo, Gangipora and Wagur of Tehsil Chadoora District Budgam. The land was notified in terms of Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) vide Collectorate No. 359/LAC dated 05.08.1996. The Administrative Department made declaration as per the mandate of Sections 6 and 7 of the Act vide RD No. REV-226 of 1986. In terms of the said declaration, the Collector was asked to acquire the land specification of which is given in the final award dated 12th November, 1987. After issuing notices under Section 11 of the Act and after seeking objections from the interested persons, the Collector passed final award and awarded compensation of Rs.20,000/- per kanal for Bagh Khushki land, Rs.18,000/- per kanal for Maidani land and Rs.15000/- per kanal for Gairmumkin land and other kinds of land.
4. It appears that the interested persons (respondents herein) have disputed the adequacy of compensation and requested the Collector to make reference to the District Judge in terms of Section 18 of the Act. The Collector has sent the references to District Judge, Budgam and the files were received by District Judge, Budgam and Registry of District Judge, Budgam diarized the said references.
5. It appears that the references were withdrawn from the files of District Judge, Budgam and transferred to the court of 2nd Additional District Judge, Srinagar. The 2nd Additional District Judge, Srinagar passed the judgment dated 19th October, 1991 in exparte and the Collector was asked to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.45000/- per kanal with Jabrana 15% and interest @ of 4% per annum from the date of the order to the respondents.
6. The respondents have examined the witnesses, namely, Mohammad Ramzan Sofi, Ghulam Mohammad Ganaie, Maharaj Krishan, Abdul Gani Mir, Aziz Ganaie, Mohammad Yousuf and Ghulam Mohammad Dar. The Collector has not lead any evidence.
7. The Collector assailed the said judgment before this Court and this Court upheld the judgment of 2nd Additional District Judge, Srinagar dated 19th October, 1991.
8. The appellant, Power Grid Corporation of India, preferred an appeal against the judgment passed by this Court before the Apex Court. The Apex Court has with the consent of both the sides set aside the said judgment and remitted back the references to the reference Court with the direction to the appellant to lead evidence and, the reference Court to decide the matter afresh while taking into consideration the evidence already lead and the evidence of the appellant.
9. It appears that in terms of order passed by this Court on Civil Transfer Application No. 45/1998, all the references were withdrawn from the files of 2nd Additional District Judge, Srinagar and transferred to the court of Additional District Judge, Srinagar vide order dated 2nd March, 1999.
10. The appellant examined Jagjit Singh (Patwari), Abdul Rashid (Patwari), Nazir Ahmad Rather (Patwari), Ghulam Ahmad Ganaie Tehsildar, Mohammad Suliaman Horticulture Development Officer of Baghat-i-Kanipora and Mohammad Altaf Mir Block Development Officer Chadoora, Wagura as witnesses. The learned Additional District Judge, Srinagar passed the impugned judgment and held that the claimants/respondents are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.44000/- per kanal with Jabrana @
