Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF BIHAR
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
RATAN LAL SABU & VS. ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/08/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCALE (6)83
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1996
Present:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.Ramaswamy
Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.B. Pattanaik
H.Agarwal, Sr. Adv. R.P.Singh and B.B.Singh, Advs. with him
for the appellant
D.Mukherjee and Sanjay Ghosh, Advs. for the Respondents
O R D E R
The following Order of the Court was delivered:
State of Bihar
V.
Ratan Lal Sabu Ors. etc.
O R D E R
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 (1 of 1894) (for short, the ’Act’) was published
on June 14, 1972 acquiring 20.40 acres of land for
construction of Getalsud Dam in Ranchi District of bihar
State. The Land Acquisition Officer in his award under
Section 11 dated November 16,1977 granted total compensation
of Rs.1,59,505.33. On reference, the Subordinate Judge
Ranchi awarded compensation Rs. 13,000/- per acre; for the
tank and well, he granted a sum of Rs.1,69,830/-. He also
awarded additional amount under Section 23(1-A) of the Act.
Dissatisfied therewith, the appeal and carried the matter in
appeals. The High Court in the impugned judgment and decree
in Original Decree Nos. 108 and 109 of 1987 dated January
10, 1994 confirmed the award and decree of the reference
Court. Thus, these appeal by special leave.
We have gone through the judgment of the High Court and
the reference Court. The learned Judge has not referred to
the correct principles of law in determining the
compensation. It is an admitted position that the reference
Court has relied upon an earlier award in respect of a
neighbouring village determining the compensation of land in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
Rs. 10,000/- per acre. We cannot leave any material on
record, nor has it discussed in either judgments the basis
or reliance as regards the relevant value of the land etc.
Under those circumstances, relying on that judgment per se
may not be wholly correct. It is not in dispute that these
are Class I wet crop lands. The Land Acquisition Officer
awarded the compensation for Class I lands @ Rs.2,226/- and
proportionately decreased the value as regards the quality
of the other lands. We take all the 20 acres of land as
Class I land since there is no acceptable material as
regards the quality of the land.
Under these circumstances, taking the totality of the
facts and circumstances, we think that the appropriate
market value would be Rs. 6,000/- per acre. It is now
settled law that when the water is being used from the tank
and the well for cultivation of the land, no separate value
could be granted towards the tank and the well. This Court
elaborately considered this aspect of the matter in the case
of O. Janardhan Reddy & Ors. vs. Spl. Dy. Collector. L.A.
Unit - IV, LMD. Karimnagar, A.P. & Ors. [(1994) 6 SCC 456].
Accordingly, we hold that the respondents are not entitled
to the separate value of Rs. 1,69,890/- towards the value of
the tank and the well. Since the award of the Collector is
of November 16, 1977, the grant of the additional amount
under Section 23(1-A) is clearly illegal. Accordingly, the
additional amount under Section 23(1-A) for a sum of Rs.
1,16,000/- also stands set aside.
The claimants are entitled to the interest from
1.1.1966, the date on which the possession was taken for a
period of one year @ 9% and thereafter @ 15% till date of
deposit on the enhanced compensation. The claimants are also
entitled to the solatium at 30% on the enhanced compensation
till date of deposit. The claimants are also entitled to the
additional amount @ Rs. 12% on the market value from the
date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) to
the date of award of the Collector or from the date of
taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier.
The appeals are accordingly allowed, but in the
circumstances without costs.