PHOOL KUMARI Vs. L A O

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Ashish Srivastava holding brief of Sri Vipin Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing counsel. This appeal is directed against the judgment, order and award of the reference court dated 5.1.1990 passed in LAR No. 70 of 1988 (Somnath Oberai Vs. Land Acquisition Officer and another). The land in dispute is situated in village Indarpur, Tehsil Bilaspur District Rampur. One plot No. 40 Kha of land having an area of 0.27 acre belonging to the claimant-appellant was acquired. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 14.11.1981 and the award was made on 22.9.1986 offering marking value compensation @ 9600/- per acre. On reference it was enhanced to Rs. 17,000/- per acre by the Additional District Judge and statutory benefits were also extended. In appeal the claimant- appellant has claimed market value @ of Rs. 17000/-. The argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that the judgment and order of the reference court is vitiated for the non consideration of the two sale deeds dated 10.6.1980 and 7.3.2006. The further argument is that interest is payable on solatium as well as additional amount. A perusal of the impugned judgment and order passed by the reference court indicates that the sale deed dated 10.6.1986 was executed by one Raj Kumar in favour of Model Sahkari Avas Samiti, Rudrapur and the other sale deed dated 7.3.1986 was executed by one Jivan Das in favour of M/s Bala Ji Soya Udhyog, Rampur. Under both the sale deeds lands of different village and district i.e. village Rudrapura Tehsil Kichcha in District Nainital were transferred and as such the reference court has rightly discarded the said sale deeds. The contention that the land transferred under the aforesaid sale deeds was adjacent to the acquired land cannot be accepted in the absence of any evidence to show the location of the land under the sale deeds vis. a vis. acquired land and there respective potentiality. Therefore, in my opinion the reference court committed no error in disbelieving the said two sale deeds and n not taking them as exemplar sale deeds for the purposes of determining the compensation for the acquired land. On the other hand in respect to the same acquisition/notification and land of the same village, the District Judge has relied upon the judgment and order of the reference court dated 7.12.1988 passed in LAR No. 28 of 1987 (Har Charan Singh Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Rampur) wherein the market value was finally determined to be Rs. 17000/- per acre. There is nothing on record to indicate or to establish that the said judgment has not become final and that any appeal is pending against the same. In view of the above the District Judge has rightly relied upon the aforesaid judgment in awarding market value @ Rs. 17000/- per sq. yard. There is no other positive evidence on the basis of which any further enhancement in the of market value can be made. As far as grant of interest on solatium and additional amount is concerned they are both components of the compensation and interest is payable on both these components. The reference court in fact has awarded interest on the whole of the compensation which includes solatium as well as additional amount. Therefore, there is no error even in this respect and the argument that interest has not been awarded on solatium and additional amount is misconceived. In the totality of the facts and circumstances as stated there is no merits in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed with the observation as above. No costs.