Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 544 (ORI)

STATE OF ORISSA v. CHANDRA SEKHAR MUND

2002-08-23

B.P.DAS

body2002
JUDGMENT : B.P. Das, J. - This appeal is u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short 'the Act') challenging the award passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Dharamgarh in M.J.C. No. 60/81 of 1988-91 while disposing an application u/s 18 of the said Act. 2. The fact leading to this appeal is that the land of the present Respondent was acquired for the purpose of Upper Indravati Multipurpose Project for which notification u/s 4(i) of the Act was published on 31.7.1987. As per the aforesaid notification, the lands appertaining to Plot No. 1375/1711 measuring an area of Ac. 1.56 decimals. Plot No. 639 measuring an area of Ac. 0.82 decimals, and Plot No. 640 measuring an area of Ac. 0.38 decimals, in total Ac. 2.76 decimals under Khata No. 34 situated in village Kasibahal belonging to the present Respondent were acquired. The' market value of the land acquired was assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector at Rs. 9.4607- towards the valuation and the same was received by the present Respondent under objection. According to the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, the value of the land as fixed, so far as Ata land is concerned @ Rs. 2.000/- per acre. So far as Berna land land is concerned, the value of land was fixed @ Rs. 4,762 - per acre. The Respondent claimed compensation @ Rs. 10.000/- per acre in respect of Ata land and Rs. 12.000/- per acre in respect of Berna land. There is no dispute to the fact that Ac. 1.56 decimals in Plot No. 1375/1711 and Ac. 0.82 decimals in Plot No. 639 are Ata Mamuli variety of land and Ac. 0.38 decimals in Plot No. 640 is of Berna variety of land and the same was cultivable land till the date of acquisition. 3. From the judgment of the Reference Court, it is found that on behalf of the present Respondent one Chandra Sekhar Mund, who was looking after the case was examined as P.W.1. He has stated that so far as Berna land is concerned, he had developed the land by spending a huge amount and during the time of acquisition of the land, the Ata variety of land was sold @ Rs. 10.000/- per acre, and Berna variety of land was sold @ Rs. 12.000/- per acre. That apart, it was also brought into the evidence that the land of Subash Mund. 10.000/- per acre, and Berna variety of land was sold @ Rs. 12.000/- per acre. That apart, it was also brought into the evidence that the land of Subash Mund. which was acquired under the self-same notification and in which the rate fixed by the Land Acquisition Collector was challenged before this Court and this Court has fixed the rate of Ata land @ Rs. 8.000/- per acre and Berna land @ Rs. 10.000/- per acre. The fixation of the aforesaid rate by this Court in respect of the land of Subash Mund was also admitted by opposite party No. 1 i.e. the Land Acquisition Collector (the Appellant herein). It further reveals that the Land Acquisition Collector admitted that the land of Subash Mund is situated in the same village of the Respondent and was acquired under the same notification. Basing upon the rate fixed in case of Subash Mund, the Subordinate Judge, Dharamgarh fixed-the rate of Ata land @ Rs. 8,000/- per acre and Berna variety of land @ Rs. 10,000/-per acre. At this stage, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that even though the lands of the Respondent are of the same variety that of Subash Mund but there is nothing on record to indicate the potential value of the land in question. Even though the Respondent during the proceeding u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Subordinate Judge has led oral evidence that he had developed the land by spending huge amount, but no document was placed before the Court to substantiate his case that the potential value of his land is equal to that of the land of Subash Mund. 4. Be that as it may, there is evidence on record that the lands of Subash Mund as well as the Respondent situated in the same village and have been acquired under the same notification, but there is no evidence regarding the potentiality of the land of the present Respondent. 5. Considering all these aspects, in my considered opinion, it would be proper to fix the rate of Bahal and Berna land @ Rs. 9,500/- per acre and @ Rs. 7.500/- per acre in respect of Ata land. Apart form this the Respondent is entitled to get admissible benefits as well as the interest on cost as awarded by the Subordinate Judge. Dharamgarh. 6. The First Appeal is according disposed of.