STATE OF ORISSA Vs. MST. PADMATOLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the Subordinate Judge. Sambalpur in a land acquisition proceeding increasing the amount of compensation in favour of the Respondent. For a breeding farm at Kalamati; the Government of Orissa acquired 7.62 acres of land belonging to the Respondent. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 23_LI964. The Land Acquisition Collector has awarded a compensation of Rs. 3,944.42 including Rs. 16.58 towards acquisition of trees. The Respondent challenged the award as grossly inadequate and claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000/ - per acre and 30% towards potential value on the ground that the lands are situated very close to the National Highway, Hirakud Dam, Burla Medical College, Burla Engineering College and other institutions of importance and the lands are in a fast developing locality. She also claimed interest. On a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the learned Subordinate Judge has fixed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 5,000/ - per acre for 'Bahal' land, Rs. 3,000/ - per acre for 'Barna' land and Rs. 2,000/ - per acre for 'Ata' land. He has fixed the valuation of the trees at Rs. 25/ -. The learned Subordinate Judge has also awarded additional compensation at the rate of 15% and interest at the rate of 6%.

(2.) IN appeal, it is contended that the Respondent is not entitled to any amount in excess of the amount of compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Collector, inasmuch as she has not definitely stated the amount of compensation in her objection. It is further contended that the valuation as fixed by the Subordinate Judge is not proper.

(3.) IN the objection filed before the Land Acquisition Officer, the Respondent claimed that the compensation awarded was not proper, she was entitled to higher compensation because she had made improvements on the lands and the classification of the lands was not correct, inasmuch as the lands are raiyati lands. The Respondent claimed the compensation at the High Court rate, which means the value of the lands should be as decided by the High Court for the lands of the same quality acquired for the same purpose. In her statement in Court, the Respondent has stated that the lands are at a distance of about ten yards from the National Highway. According to the provisions of Section 9(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, the notice shall state the particulars of the land needed and shall require all persons interested in the land to appear personally or by agent before the Collector at a time and place therein mentioned (it should not be earlier than fifteen days after the publication of the notice), and to state the nature of their respective interests in the land and the amount and particulars of their claims to compensation for such interests, and their objections (if any) to the measurements made under Section 8 of the Act. The Collector may in any case require such statement to be made in writing and signed by the party or his agent. Sub -section (1) of Section 25 envisages that when the applicant has made a claim to compensation, pursuant to any notice given under Section 9, the amount awarded to him by the Court shall not exceed the amount so claimed or be less than the amount awarded by the Collector. Sub -section (2) of the aforesaid section envisages that when the applicant has refused to make such claim or has omitted without sufficient reason (to be allowed by the Judge) to make such claim, the amount awarded by the Court shall in no case exceed the amount awarded by the Collector and according to Sub -section (3) when the applicant has omitted for a sufficient reason (to be allowed by the Judge) to make such claim, the amount awarded to him by the Court shall not be less than, and may exceed, the amount awarded by the Collector.