AMRA Vs. COLLECTOR BARWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the present appeals have been filed by the appellants under Sec. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 r/w Sec. 96 of CPC, 1908 being aggrieved by the award dtd. 22/8/2019 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Badwani, District-Badwani dismissing the application for enhancement of the amount.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that appellants in F.A. No.1936/2019, were the owners of survey Nos.96/2 and 98/1 situated at village-Nandgaon, District-Badwani and appellant in F.A. No.1937/2019 was the owner of survey Nos.96/1, 98/2 and 98/3 situated at village-Nandgaon, District-Badwani. On date 7/12/2014, a notification under Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published showing intention to acquisition of the land situated in the aforementioned survey numbers. In pursuance of the land acquisition proceedings, Land Acquisition Case No.4/A-82/2012-13 was registered before the Land Acquisition Officer in both the appeals. On 27/9/2013, an award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer and the award was affirmed by District Collector, Badwani. An application was preferred before respondent No.1/Collector seeking reference under Sec. 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for enhancement of compensation. In pursuance of the application under Sec. 18, reference was submitted before the reference court and after recording the evidence of the appellants, the reference court vide order dtd. 22/8/2019 dismissed the reference application.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the impugned award, appellants filed these first appeals before this Court and submitted that reference court has committed serious error of law in not applying the provision of proviso to Sec. 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as 'Act, 2013') on the ground that the award was passed on 27/9/2013 i.e. prior to enforcement of the Act, 2013. Appellants further submitted that it is undisputed that notice under Sec. 12 was served in the month of February, 2014 as well as amount was deposited in the year of 2015, therefore, as per proviso to Sec. 24(2), the appellants are entitled for compensation in accordance with the provisions of Act, 2013, hence, impugned award deserves to be set aside.