LILAWATI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Ajeet Kumar learned counsel for the appellant and Sri B.D. Mandhyan learned counsel who appears for the respondent. This is an appeal by the claimant under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act ( herein after referred to as an Act) for enhancement of compensation awarded. A notification under Section 4 of the Act to acquire the land for the benefit of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti was issued on 19.12.1978 which was followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 20.12.1978. The possession of the acquired land was taken over on 23.11.1979. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (in short SLAO) after examining the various exemplars offered compensation on the market value @ Rs. 7,129.63 paise per acre along with statutory benefits plus Rs. 1690 for the tube well. The claimants were not satisfied with the offer so made and therefore preferred a reference under Section 18 of the Act. The said land acquisition reference no. 22 of 1982 was decided vide judgment and order dated 24.3.1983 and the rate of compensation was enhanced to Rs. 47,600/- for 1.9 acre of the land involved along with statutory benefits. The claimant still not satisfied by the award of the reference court preferred this appeal for further enhancement of compensation to of Rs. 2,88,779/- along with other benefits admissible. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that in view of the sale deed (paper no. 25'C') the claimant appellant is entitle to enhancement as prayed for. This is a sale deed which has been executed by Hira Devi @ Rs. 2,81,000/- per acre. However, the said sale deed can not be taken as an exemplar for determining the market value of the acquired land, in as much as, the said sale deed is not in respect of an open piece of land. By the said sale deed the vendor had transferred her interest in the cinema hall. The picture hall was in existence on the land under transfer. Accordingly, the said exemplar can not be made the basis of awarding compensation and the court below had rightly discarded the same. The other sale deed which has been relied upon by the counsel for the appellant is one which has been executed by one Chandumal in respect an abadi land situate within the municipal limits having an area 0.13 acre. This sale deed is comparatively of a small piece of land which was of an abadi nature whereas the acquired land was purely of agricultural nature and as such it also can not form the basis for determining the market value of the acquired land. The reference court for good reasons has discarded the other sale deeds and has held that they are not good exemplars. The reasoning given by the reference court for rejecting them can not be faulted with. In short in the absence of any positive evidence no case for any further enhancement has been made out. Therefore, in my view the appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. No other point was raised and pressed before me. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs.