MITHILESH Vs. COLLECTOR AGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act have been filed by the land owners whose land has been acquired by the U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad for developing a housing accommodation cum street scheme popularly known as "trans Jamuna Grah 1sthan Evam Sarak Yojna, Agra" Necessary notices were issued under sections 28 and 32 of the U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam corresponding to sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Land Acquisition Act on 31-1-1970 and 21-8-1974. The award was made by the Special land acquisition Officer on 15-4-1978. He awarded compensation at the rate of Rs 7.50 for the land lying within 100 yards from the bye pass road, at the rate of Rs. 5/- in respect of next strip 100 yards wide and for the remaining land at the rate of Rs. 3.75 per sq. yard, possession over the land was delivered to the acquiring body on 27-4-1978. Aggrieved by the award given by the special land Acquisition Officer, the claimants filed applications before the collector for making reference to the Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and claimed that compensation should be awarded to them at the rate of Rs. 40/- per sq. yards. THESE references were decided by a common judgment by the Tribunal on 19-6-1985 and the compensation was awarded at a flat rate of Rs. 16.50 per sq. yard.

(2.) BEFORE the Tribunal, the parties filed some documentary evidence and each of them examined one witness. The documentary evidence filed by the appellant consisted of three sale deeds and two awards in respect of land lying to the south of the bye pass road in respect of which compensation at the rate of Rs. 16.54 had been awarded. The three sale deeds are Exts. 6, 7 and 8 and were executed on 30-1-1970 and 19-1-70 respectively.

(3.) IT was also urged by Sri Agarwal that in respect of these awards references are already pending in the Court. There is, however, no material on the record to show this. The learned Standing counsel was also not in a position to make any categorical statement in this regard for want of information. IT is, therefore, not possible for this Court to take the view that the matter is subjudice and the amount of compensation determined in these references has not become final. The burden lay on the appellants to show that these awards have not become final and had been challenged in references under section 18. The Tribunal, therefore, cannot be faulted for determining the market value of the land on the basis of these awards.