Compensation in land acquisition cases must reflect the actual market value and consider all relevant sale instances to ensure fairness.

JUDGMENT :

Biswajit Palit, J.

This appeal under Section 54 of L.A. Act is preferred challenging the judgment and award dated 29.09.2021 delivered by Learned L.A. Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, Court No.2 in connection with Case No.Misc.(L.A.)108 of 2015.

[2] Heard Learned counsel, Mr. H. Sarkar present for the appellants and also heard Learned counsel, Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee present for the claimant-respondent.

[3] In course of hearing, Mr. H. Sarkar, Learned counsel appearing for the appellants drawn the attention of this Court that the Learned L.A. Judge at the time of delivery of judgment in the aforesaid case did not consider the sale instances relied upon by the L.A. Collector at the time of determination of compensation and without any basis has awarded the compensation @ Rs.50,00,000/- per kani which was too high considering the prevailing market price of the locality at the time of acquisition of land. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that before the Learned L.A. Judge the respondent-claimant could adduce any strong materials i.e. appropriate exemplar deeds showing higher market price of the adjacent land of the acquired land on that relevant point of time of acquisition for which the judgment delivered by the Learned L.A. Judge cannot be sustained in the eye of law. So, Learned counsel for the appellants urged for interference of this Court and prayed for allowing this appeal by setting aside the judgment and award delivered by the Learned L.A. Judge.

[4] On the other hand, Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Learned counsel appearing for the claimant-respondent submitted that 0.0300 acres of land belonging to the respondent-claimant was acquired for the purpose of construction of approach road from Siddhi Ashram to Agartala Bye-pass vide notification dated 11.02.2009 under Section 4 of the L.A. Act followed by declaration vide No.F.09(14)-REV/ACQ/XIV08 dated 13.07.2009 and the acquired land is situated under Mouja Badharghat which is nearby the railway station and other commercial establishments and it had good potential value on that relevant point of time but the Learned L.A. Collector ignoring the relevant sale instances only determined the amount of compensation @ Rs.20,00,000/- per kani but on that relevant point of time, the value of the acquired land was more than Rs.50,00,000/- per kani. So, according to Learned counsel for the claimant-respondent the judgment and award delivered by the Learned L.A. Judge was reasonable and justified and there is no scope for interference with the award delivered by the Learned L.A. Judge and urged for dismissal of this appeal upholding the judgment of the Learned L.A. Judge.

[5] Learned counsel for the claimant-respondent further submitted that as the matter is pending since long back, so, a direction may be given to the appellants to deposit the amount to the Registry of the High Court at an earliest convenience.

[6] In the case at hand, it appears that the L.A. Collector vide notification dated 11.02.2009 under Section 4 of the L.A. Act and subsequent declaration vide No.F.09(14)-REV/ACQ/XIV08 dated 13.07.2009 had acquired land measuring .03 acres belonging to the referring-claimants of khatian No.34687 appertaining to C.S. plot No.30166/p under mouja Badharghat, Sheet No.5(4)p under Badharghat tehashil for the purpose of construction of approach road from Siddhi Ashram to Agartala Bye-pass and the L.A. Collector considering ten numbers of exemplar deeds determined the value of the acquired land @ Rs.20,00,000/- per kani for ‘Bastu’ (Tilla) class of land. Before the Learned L.A. Judge the referring-claimants claimed compensation @ Rs.1,50,00,000/- per kani. According