U P AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD Vs. MITHILESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAKASH Krishna, J. The above appeals are in the nature of cross-appeals and have been filed against the judgment and decree dated 12. 8. 1992 passed by the Presiding Officer, U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal, Agra in L. A. Case No. 4 of 1991. The claimant Smt. Mithlesh has preferred appeal No. 560 of 1992 for futher enhancement of the compensation amount as awarded by the Tribunal U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad has filed the appeal No. 179 cf 1993 to set aside the judgment and decree of the Tribunal and to restore back the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.

(2.) A scheme known as Sikandra Grihsthan Evarn Sarak Yojana, Agra was framed by U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, (hereinafter called as the Parishad), as a housing scheme. A vast piece of land of village Kakareta Mustakil wherein the plot No. 900 area 1. 19 acre, No. 912 area 0. 14 acre and No. 913 area 1. 6 acre, total area 3. 19 acre equivalent to 10,887. 18 sq. yards were acquired by issuing notifications under Section 28 of U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam and under Section 32 01 u. c aroaid Adhiniyam. Notifications under Sections 28 and 32 of the said Adhiniyam correspond to Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. The notifications are dated 4. 4. 1970 and 8. 6. 1980 respectively. The possession of the acquired land was taken over on 26. 7. 1983. The award made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarding compensation is dated 26. 8. 1985. A sum of Rs. 36,363. 18 paise was determined as the amount payable to the land owner, namely, Mawasi Ram, besides solatium at the rate of 30% and interest etc. A total sum of Rs. 1,11,551. 57 was found to be payable by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to the tenure holder, namely, Mawasi Ram as compensation towards the acquisition of the aforesaid three plots.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved by the aforesaid award of the Tribunal, the claimant as well as the Parishad have preferred the above appeals. These two appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment as was agreed by the learned counsel for the parties also.