JUDGMENT AND ORDER : All these L. A. Appeals being L. A. App. No. 35 of 2014 [Sri Subodh Debnath v. T. I. D. C. Ltd. & Anr.], L. A. App. No. 04 of 2014 [T. I. D. C. Ltd. & Anr. v. Sri Rabindra Ch. Debnath & Anr.] C.O (FA) No. 06 of 2014 [Sri Rabindra Chandra Debnath v. T. I. D. C. Ltd. & Anr.], L. A. App. No. 05 of 2014 [T. I. D. C. Ltd. & Anr. v. Nihar Ranjan Debnath & Anr.], L. A. App. No. 11 of 2015 [Sri Pradip Ch. Das v. T. I. D. C. Ltd. & Anr.] and L. A. App. No. 13 of 2015 [Sri Nihar Das v. T. I. D. C. Ltd. & Anr.] are consolidated for disposal by a common judgment inasmuch as the references from which these appeals are concerned with the land acquired for construction of the road from Banikya Chowmuhani to the industrial growth centre under Sadar Subdivision in West Tripura district and with the emergent public work. The acquisition was under Section 17 read with Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The said acquisition was carried out in terms of the same notification under No. F.(8)REV/SEQ/vi/07 dated 04.10.2007. 2. The judgment and awards challenged in the individual appeals or in the cross objection are shown in the tabular form below for purpose of reference: Table –I 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sl. No. L.A. App/C. O. No. Name of the parties Reference case No. Class of land and area of land Plot No. 1. L.A. App. No. 35 of 2014 Subodh Debnath v. TIDC & Anr Misc (L.A) No. 190 of 2010 Viti(tilla), 0.015 acres 2180/8908 2. L.A. App. No. 04 of 2014 TIDC& Anr v. Rabindra Ch. Dedbnath Misc (LA) No. 207 of 2010 Viti (till), 0.07 acres 2118 3. C. O. (FA).No. 06 of 2014 Rabindra Ch. Dedbnath v. TIDC& Anr L.A. App. No. 04 of 2014 4. L.A. App. No. 05 of 2014 TIDC& Anr v. Nihar Ranjan Debnath & Anr Misc (LA) 206 of 2010 Bastu (Till), 0.07 acres 2108 5. L.A. App. No. 11 of 2015 Pradip Ch. Das v. TIDC & Anr. Misc (LA) No. 188 of 2010 Dokan (tilla), 0.02 acres 2181 6. L.A. App.No.13 of 2015 Nihar Das Vs. TIDC & Anr. L.A. App. No. 05 of 2014 TIDC& Anr v. Nihar Ranjan Debnath & Anr Misc (LA) 206 of 2010 Bastu (Till), 0.07 acres 2108 5. L.A. App. No. 11 of 2015 Pradip Ch. Das v. TIDC & Anr. Misc (LA) No. 188 of 2010 Dokan (tilla), 0.02 acres 2181 6. L.A. App.No.13 of 2015 Nihar Das Vs. TIDC & Anr. Misc (LA) No.192 of 2010 Viti (Tilla), 0.005 acres 2181/8909 The judgment and award which are under challenged in the appeals/Cross objection are referred in the table II below: Table II Appeal Nos. Judgment and award as challenged in the appeal Rate of the land per kani L.A. App. No. 35 of 2014 21.06.2014 in Misc L.A 139 of 2010 Rs. 9,00000/per kani L. A. App. No. 04 of 2014 23.12.2013 in Misc L.A. 207 of 2010 Rs. 15,00000/per kani C. O. (FA).No. 06 of 2014 23.12.2013 in Misc L.A. 207 of 2010 Rs. 15,00000/per kani L.A. App. No. 05 of 2014 13.12.2013 In Misc L.A. No. 206 of 2010 Rs. 15,00000/per kani L.A. App. No. 11 of 2015 31.03.2015 In Misc L.A. No. 188 of 2010 Rs. 10,00000/per kani L.A. App. No. 13 of 2015 22.05.2015 In Misc L. A. No. 192 of 2010 Rs. 30,00000/per kani 3. It is apparent from the Table I that L.A. Appeal No. 04 of 2014 and L.A. Appeal No. 05 of 2014 have been preferred by Tripura Industrial Development Corporation (TIDC in short) against the impugned judgment and award inasmuch as according to them the rate as determined by the land acquisition judge is exorbitantly high and disproportionate to the market rate prevailing in that area. Moreover, they have contended that the area through which the road was constructed or widened even though is not far away from the capital city but the area is still underdeveloped and under populous. The other appeals are filed by the landlosers at whose instance the references were made and were registered under No. as shown in the column No. 4 of the Table I. 4. The solitary cross objection in this batch of appeals and cross-objections has also been filed by the landloser for further enhancement of the rate as he was not happy with the rate as has been determined by the L.A. Judge. 5. The solitary cross objection in this batch of appeals and cross-objections has also been filed by the landloser for further enhancement of the rate as he was not happy with the rate as has been determined by the L.A. Judge. 5. There is another common feature emerging from the evidence is that the following sale deeds were relied by the referent claimants in support of their claim before the L.A. Judge in all the reference related with the appeals and the cross-objections under consideration: 1. Sale Deed No. 1447 dated 11.01.2005, 2. Sale Deed No. 1118 dated 04.01.2002 3. Sale Deed No. 1117 dated 04.01.2002 6. All these sale deeds are relating to viti class of land and are marked as Exhibit-1 in series. The sale deed No. 1447 dated 11.01.2005 is for transaction of a very small piece of land measuring .01 acre which was sold at Rs. 75,000/meaning 30,00000/per kani, The sale deed No. 1118 dated 04.01.2002 is for transaction of another very small piece of land measuring .01 acre which was sold at Rs. 50,000/meaning 20,00000/per kani and the sale deed No. 1117 dated 04.01.2002 is for transaction of a very small piece of land measuring .01 acre of land which was sold at Rs. 50,000/meaning 20,00000/per kani. 7. From the Land Acquisition Collector the following sale deeds were relied and introduced in the evidence: (1) The sale deed No. 1181 dated 03.01.2005 for an area of land measuring 5 gandas 3 karas for Rs. 50,000/@Rs. 1,80,000/per kani. (2) The sale deed No. 111674 dated 24.11.2006 for an area of land .20 acre for Rs. 50,000/meaning @ Rs.1,00,000/per kani. (3) The sale deed No. 111676 dated 24.11.2006 for an area of land measuring .20 acre measuring for Rs. 50,000/meaning @Rs.1,00,000/per kani. (4) The sale deed No. 16205 dated 31.05.2006 for an area of land measuring .05 acre for Rs. 10,000/meaning @ Rs.80,000/per kani. (5) The sale deed No. 114243 dated 14.10.2004 for an area of land measuring .20 acre for Rs. 38,000/meaning @ Rs. 76,000/per kani. All the above sale deeds have been admitted as Exbt. A series at the instance of the L.A. Collector. 8. Heard Mr. U.K. Majumder, learned counsel has appeared for the referring claimant-appellants and the cross objector as well as for the referring claimant-respondents in the appeals filed by the TIDC against the said judgment and award. Mr. 76,000/per kani. All the above sale deeds have been admitted as Exbt. A series at the instance of the L.A. Collector. 8. Heard Mr. U.K. Majumder, learned counsel has appeared for the referring claimant-appellants and the cross objector as well as for the referring claimant-respondents in the appeals filed by the TIDC against the said judgment and award. Mr. G.S. Das, learned counsel has appeared for TIDC-appellants, the TIDC-respondents in the appeals and for the TIDC-respondents in the cross objections. 9. Both the learned counsel have fairly submitted that in view of the law as enunciated by the Apex Court in Meharwal Khewaji Trust (Regd.) Faridkot & Ors. V. State of Punjab, reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2822. Determination of rate by averaging the relates is no more treated as the ‘good’ tool for assessment. It has been observed in Meharwal Khewaji (supra) as follows: “15. It is clear that when there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, it is the general rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied, that it is a bona fide transaction has to be considered and accepted. When the land is being compulsorily taken away from a person, he is entitled to the highest value which similar land in the locality is shown to have fetched in a bona fide transaction entered into between a willing purchaser and a willing seller near about the time of the acquisition. In our view, it seems to be only fair that where sale-deeds pertaining to different transactions are relied on behalf of the Government, the transaction representing the highest value should be preferred to the rest unless there are strong circumstances justifying a different course. It is not desirable to take an average of various sale-deeds placed before the authority/court for fixing fair compensation.” 10. The sale deeds as relied in Meharwal Khewai Trust (supra) pertaining were for “different transactions”. Those were considered as the basis by the appropriate government. The course as suggested has been considered to be ‘fair’ for assessment. There should be strong justification from relying other course or method. In this regard, from the assessment sheet relating to the L.A. Case No. 14/SDR/2017 and 16/SDR/ 2017 which are part of the paper book of the L.A. Appeal No. 35 of 2014, L.A. App No. 13 of 2015, L.A. App No. 05 of 2014, L.A. App. There should be strong justification from relying other course or method. In this regard, from the assessment sheet relating to the L.A. Case No. 14/SDR/2017 and 16/SDR/ 2017 which are part of the paper book of the L.A. Appeal No. 35 of 2014, L.A. App No. 13 of 2015, L.A. App No. 05 of 2014, L.A. App. No. 04 of 2014 and L.A. App. No. 11 of 2015, it transpires that the same assessment sheet and the sale deeds were made basis to determine the land value by the L.A. Judge. The relevant part of the assessment sheet, therefore, becomes very relevant and accordingly the same is reproduced: “….The reports of Amin and the maps are made part of this proceeding and marked as Annexure-A series. The particulars of the reference deeds collected for both the moujas are narrated below: Sl. No. Mouja Plot No. Class of land Area in acre Deed No. & date Total value of land Value of land per kani Distance from the alnd proposed to be 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Laxmipur sheet No. 1 99, 98, 96 Tilla 0.11 5 1­181 dt. 03.01.200 5 Rs. 50,000/ ­ Rs. 1,73,913/­ 80 ft. 2. R. K. Nagar sheet No.3/p 2074 Tilla 0.20 1­11674 dt. 24.11.200 6 Rs. 50,000/ ­ Rs. 1,00,000/­ 630 ft 3. ­do­ 2074 2132 Till Bast u (tilla ) 0.20 1­11676 dt. 24.11.200 6 Rs. 50,000/ ­ Rs. 1,00,000/­ 700 feet 4. ­do­ 2230 Bast u (tilla ) 0.05 1­6205 dt. 31.05.200 6 Rs. 10,000/ ­ Rs. 80,000/­ 573 feet 5. ­do­ 2181/890 9 Viti (tilla ) 0.01 1­447 dt. 11.01.200 5 Rs. 75,000/ ­ 30,00,000/ ­ On the land proposed for acquisitio n 6. ­do­ 1915 Tilla 0.20 1­11243 dt. 14.10.200 4 Rs. 38,000/ ­ Rs. 76,000/­ 1420 feet 7. ­do­ 2247 Viti (tilla ) 0.10 1­7235 dt. 12.08.200 3 Rs. 10,000/ ­ Rs. 40,000/­ 1060 feet The particulars of the reference sale deeds are examined meticulously. It appears that out of all the reference deeds as narrated above, the land of sale deeds at Sl. No. 7 was executed in the year 2003. As a result, this deed is not confined within the preceding period of three years from the date of notification of both the proceedings. The rest reference deed at Sl. Nos. It appears that out of all the reference deeds as narrated above, the land of sale deeds at Sl. No. 7 was executed in the year 2003. As a result, this deed is not confined within the preceding period of three years from the date of notification of both the proceedings. The rest reference deed at Sl. Nos. 1 to 6 were executed within the prescribed period of three years from the date of both the notifications as these are spreading over within the period of 2004 to 2006. It is seen that the rates of the sale deeds at Sl. Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 related to transfer of tilla, Bastu (Tilla) & Bhiti (tilla) classes of land are ranging from Rs. 76,000/to Rs. 1,73,913/per kani while the land of sale deed at Sl. No. 5 representing the value of Bhiti (tilla) land executed in the year 2005 at an exorbitant rate of Rs. 30,00,000/per kani. This rates relates to transfer of land having small area measuring 0.01 acre. Such rate cannot be representative as buyer are keenly desirous to purchase such land at higher rate. Besides, location of transferred land of all the sale deeds except Sl. No. 5 are not adjoining to the road from Banikya Choumuhani to TIDC office gate. It is obvious that road side land enjoys frontage facility having scope of utilizing the land for commercial purpose, construction of houses etc. The rates of such road side land cannot be compared with the rate of land located away from the road. As such, the deeds so far collected cannot be comparable for determination of valuation of the land proposed to be acquired which having higher potentialities. The rates of sale deed Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 were transferred at low rates while the rate of sale deed No. 5 is found much higher. Considering the discussions as made in above, all these deeds are kept out of consideration from this proceeding. The rates of sale deed Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 were transferred at low rates while the rate of sale deed No. 5 is found much higher. Considering the discussions as made in above, all these deeds are kept out of consideration from this proceeding. In absence of tangible sale instances in the concerned locality, the SDM, sadar has been asked to make an inquiry into the concerned plots of land proposed for acquisition and to furnish market value of the land acquired at an early date vide fax message No. F.DM/W/LA/SDR/40/07683 dated 06.02.2009 and the SDM, Sadar furnished his report vide his office letter No. F.4(24)/SDM/SDR/REV/08/475 dated 16.02.2009 which is also made part of this proceeding and marked as Annexure-B series. The rates of different classes of land involved in this proceeding are as follows: Sl. No. Name of Mouja C.S. Plot No. Class of land Valuation of land (per kani) 1. R. K. Nagar Sheet No. 3 2181/8909/, 2180/8908/, 2179/8780, 2178, 2180, 2160, 2158, 2139, 2145, 2126, 2130, 2116, 2115, 2118, 1766, 2108, 2102, 2101, 2132/9111, 2881, 2181/9635, 2130/9590 & 2181/8910 Dokan (Tilla) Bhiti (Tilla) & Bastu (Tilla) Commercial Rs. 4 Lacs to 6 Lacs per kani Residential Rs. 3 Lacs to 5 Lacs 2. Laxmipur Sheet No. 1 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 24, 25, 30, 31, 32 & 33 Dokan (tilla) Bhiti (till) & Bastu (tilla) Commercial Rs. 4 Lacs to 6 Lacs per kani, Residential Rs. 3 Lacs to 5 Lacs Similarly, an attempt was also made from this collectorate to make further search for collection of comparable sale deeds for the end of proper justice. Sri Debbarma, Amin in compliance of to that collected two more sale deeds for the Mouja R. K. Nagar sheet No. 3/p and submitted report on 01.07.2009 along with trace map of the concerned sheet indicating position of the sale deeds and the land proposed for acquisition. The report and the map are also made part of the proceeding and marked as Annexure-C series. The details of which are given below: Sl.No. Mouja Plot No. Class of land Area of acre Deed No. & date Total value of land Value of land per kani Distance from the land proposed to be acquired 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. The details of which are given below: Sl.No. Mouja Plot No. Class of land Area of acre Deed No. & date Total value of land Value of land per kani Distance from the land proposed to be acquired 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. R. K. Pur Sheet No. 3/p 3230, 3231 Bastu (tilla), Tilla 0.15 1­2838 dt. 19.04.2007 Rs. 20,000/­ Rs. 53,333/ 1370 ft 2. 3214, 3215, 3216 Tilla Tilla Bastu(tilla) 0.16 1­2882 dt. 19.04.2007 Rs. 20,000/­ Rs. 50,000/ 1330 ft It appears from the above that the locations of land of both the deeds are not close to road. Over & above, the rates appears to be low & not in conformity. Thus, both these deeds are discarded on the grounds as discussed in respect of sale deed Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6. Thus, consulted the above rates furnished by the SDM, Sadar as narrated above and the land maps/land statements prepared from this end and it appears that the C.S. Plot Nos. 3132/911/p, 2160, 2179/8780, 2178/p, 2180/p, 2181/8909/p, 2180/8909/p, 2181/9635/p, 2181/8910/p & 2181/p classified as Dokan (tilla), Bhiti (Tilla) & Bastu (Tilla) of Mouja R. K. Nagar and all the C. S. Plot Nos. 1/p, 2/p, 4/p, 6/p, 7/p, 8/p, 11/p, 12/p, 13/p, 24/p, 25/p, 30/p, 31/p, 32/p & 33/p classified as Dokan (Tilla), Bhiti (Tilla) & Bastu (Tilla) of Mouja R. K. Nagar come within the commercial & business area of Banikya Choumohani market. Hence, these plots of land being within the commercial area deserve higher rates for commercial & business purposes. For the rest plots of land proposed for acquisition in both the proceedings other than the aforesaid commercial plots classified as Bhit (tilla) & Bastu (tilla) which fall beyond the commercial area deserve lower rate as they are located away from Banikya Choumuhani Market area. Considering the discussion as made above as well as prevailing situation, potential development of the land, I prefer it to make average of the highest & lowest rates (both commercial & residential) proposed by the SDM, Sadar to assess valuation of the different classes of land both the proceedings and the rates determined are as below: Sl. No. Name of Mouja C. S. Plot No. Class of land Valuation of land (per kani) 1. 2 3 4 Commercial Non­-Commercial 1. No. Name of Mouja C. S. Plot No. Class of land Valuation of land (per kani) 1. 2 3 4 Commercial Non­-Commercial 1. Laxmipur Sheet No. 1 2/p, 4/p, 6/p, 7/p, 8/p, 11/p, 12/p, 13/p, 24/p, 25/p, 30/p, 31/p, 32/p & 33/p Dokan (tilla), Bhiti (tilla) & Bastu (tilla) @ Rs. 5,00,000/­ ……………… 2. R. K. Nagar sheet No. 3 3132/911/p, 2160, 2179/8780, 2178/p, 2180/p, 2181/8909/p, 2180/8909/p, 2181/9635/p, 2181/8910/p & 2181/p Dokan (tila), Bhit (tilla) & Bastu (tilla) Rs. 5,00,000/­ Rs. 4,00,000/­ 11. From the Table-II, the rate of land per kani as awarded by the L.A. Judge can be gathered and there is a clear enhancement in the rate. It would be further apparent that if the plot numbers are collated with the plot Nos. as referred in the assessment sheet. that all the plots under reference are in the commercial area under R. K. Nagar sheet No. 3 except the plots in L.A. App. No. 04 of 2014 and L.A. App No. 05 of 2014. Those plots are in the noncommercial area. Against those plots, the L.A. Judge has given Rs. 15,00,000/per kani but so far L.A. App No. 04 of 2014 is concerned, there is related Cross objection for further enhancement by the referring-claimant. All the acquired plots are under R. K. Nagar sheet No. 3, which is apparently a big Mouja. The L.A. Collector has categorized all these plots, under R. K. Nagar sheet No. 3 in two categories viz the commercial and the noncommercial plots for determining the rate of the acquired land. The L.A. Collector has determined the land valued at Rs. 5,00,000 for commercial plots and for non commercial plots at Rs. 4,00,000/. 12. Mr. U. K. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the referring claimant appellants has submitted that the L.A. Judge has failed to give fair rate for purpose of assessing the compensation. According to him, the various relevant factors were not considered by the L.A Judge. The L.A. Judge did not consider the yearly rate of acceleration of the land value for the development of the adjoining areas and for upcoming Industrial Growth Centre which is also partly operational. Mr. Majumder, learned counsel has submitted that according the L.A Collector, Dokan Tilla, Bastu Tilla and Viti Tilla are of the same class of land and all the deeds (Exbt. Mr. Majumder, learned counsel has submitted that according the L.A Collector, Dokan Tilla, Bastu Tilla and Viti Tilla are of the same class of land and all the deeds (Exbt. 1 series) are relating to vititilla, showing higher rate even higher than what has been awarded by the L.A. Judge. 13. Mr. G.S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the TIDC-appellant and respondents has submitted that the determination so far the land concerned with L.A Appl No. 04 of 2014 (CO (FA) 06 of 2014) and L.A. App. No. 05 of 2014 are concerned, the L.A. Judge has failed to appreciate the sale deeds (Exbt. A series) as produced by the requiring corporation. However, MR. Das, learned counsel appearing for TIDC-respondents has quite emphatically submitted that the land in these appeals and cross objection, all belong to the viti class of land. But the viti class land will not fetch uniform rate, there location in this regard is highly relevant. Mr. Das, learned counsel also did not dispute the categorization made by the L.A. Collector. 14. As such, the land as acquired and the subject matter of L.A. App No. 35 of 2014, L.A. App No. 11 of 2015 and L.A. App. No. 13 of 2015, are all belong to the commercial category, hereinafter will be referred to as the commercial area for purpose of this judgment. However, so far the L.A. App No. 04 of 2014 and L.A. App No. 05 of 2014 as filed by the TIDC are concerned, the acquired land falls within the noncommercial category and hence, those will be referred hereinafter as the noncommercial land. 15. In Misc L.A 192 of 2010, for the commercial are, the rate has been given at Rs. 30,00,000/per kani which has been acceded to by the TIDC and they have not preferred any appeal. The referring-claimants however have preferred this appeal for enhancement. 15 Having considered all aspect of the matter, this Court is of the view that the acquired land under the commercial category or referred as the commercial area shall bring the rate at Rs. 30,00,000/per kani whereas the acquired land fallen in the noncommercial category or as referred as the noncommercial area shall bring the rate at Rs. 20,00000 per kani . For purpose of enhancement the development index visavis the acceleration of rate has been considered having due regard to the sale deeds (Exbt. 1 series). 30,00,000/per kani whereas the acquired land fallen in the noncommercial category or as referred as the noncommercial area shall bring the rate at Rs. 20,00000 per kani . For purpose of enhancement the development index visavis the acceleration of rate has been considered having due regard to the sale deeds (Exbt. 1 series). Hence, the appellant and the cross objector shall get the rate in terms of the above. In view of this, L.A. App No. 04 of 2014 and L.A. App. No. 05 of 2014 are dismissed. All the appeals and the cross objection filed by the referring-claimant-appellants are allowed in terms of the above inference. It is made clear that the rate as declared above is applicable for the acquired land concerned with the appeals and the cross objection filed by the referring-claimants. Draw the decree/award accordingly. Send down the LCRs thereafter.