CALCUTTA METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. DOMINION LAND AND INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Substitution of Calcutta Improvement Trust by Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority sought for in the IAs, is granted. Transposition of State of West Bengal, as Appellant 2, sought for in the petition is also granted.

(2.) Calcutta Improvement Trust before its merger with Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority Appellant 1, required the entire land comprised in Dag Nos. 1247, 1248, 1249 and 1250 of Mouza Bondel and Dag Nos. 1304 and 1308 of Mouza Kasba, which was a portion of Premises No. 42. Bedia Danga 2nd Lane. P. S. Kasba/jadavpur, Calcutta for the purpose of Calcutta Improvement Trust General Improvement Scheme No. III. Stale of West Bengal Appellant 2 proposed to acquire the said land as required by Appellant 1 by issuance of a notification under Section 43 of Calcutta Improvement Act corresponding to Section 4 (1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the LA Act, published in Calcutta Gazette dated 2/11/1978. Subsequently, when Appellant 2 made a declaration, as required by Section 6 of the LA Act, the acquisition of the said land was completed. Thereafter, the First Land Acquisition Collector of Calcutta who is representing Appellant 2 the Collector, served notices on the owner of the said acquired land, M/s Dominion Land and Industries Ltd. Respondent 1, as required by S. 9 and 10 of the LA Act and invited from it a claim statement for compensation payable for its acquired land. A claim statement was accordingly filed by Respondent I, before the Collector, claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 16,000. 00 per cottah of solid land. at the rate of Rs. 12,000. 00 per cottah of marshy land, Rs. 50,000. 00 for a boundary wall and Rs 700. 00 for trees and further statutory allowance at 15 per cent on such compensation. However, in that claim statement a mention was made of the entitlement of Shri Kalidas Chakraborty Respondent 2, to a portion of compensation to be awarded for the acquired land, because of an agreement to sell dated 3/9/1975 which had been entered into between Respondent 1 and Respondent 2 to sell the acquired land. No doubt. Respondent 2 filed a separate claim statement before the Collector respecting the compensation payable to him for the acquired land. But, that claim statement did not differ in material particulars from the claim statement which had been filed by Respondent 1.

(3.) On an inquiry held by the Collector in respect of the said claim statements, as required by Section 11 of the LA Act, he found the exact a extent of the acquired land to be 8 bighas, 9 cottahs and 4 chittacks and determined the compensation payable therefor as Rs. 6,33,164.25 worked out at the rate of Rs. 3,741. 00 per cottah, and apportioned that compensation between Respondent 1 and Respondent 2, respectively, as Rs. 4,95,316.43 paise and as Rs. 1,37,847.82 paise. An award dated 5/2/1981 was also made by him accordingly.