STATE OF ORISSA Vs. BHABAGRAHI SAMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 27.10.98 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Deogarh, in L. A. Case No. 20 of 1997.

(2.) THE case of the appellant is that the Government acquired the irrigation channel and the culvert standing over hold No. 51 under plot Nos. 1202, 1203 and 1301 of village Taleisar in the district of Sambalpur which belonged to the respondent -claimant by Notification No. 37942 dated 12.6.85 published in E.O.G. No, 755 dated 17.6.85 for the purpose of construction of Bengali Dam Project. The Land Acquisition Zone Officer, Dam Site, Rengali, after assessing the claim of compensation, awarded Rs. 31,863.00 which the claimant -respondent received on protest. The case of the claimant -respondent is that he invested Rs. 1,50,000/ - for construction of the canal and the culvert on the said land. In the objection -petition the claimant -respondent also stated that several representations before the Land Acquisition Zone Officer were made and in the said objection he had stated about the detailed measurement of the canal and the culvert and the payment of compensation at the rate fixed by the Land Acquisition Zone Officer was quite low. Therefore, on the objection of the claimant -respondent, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn,) -cum -claims Tribunal, Deogarh, for adjudication.

(3.) DURING hearing of the appeal, Mrs. Kasturi, learned Additional Standing Counsel, argues that the Court below has failed to appreciate the evidence on record. The higher compensation awarded by the learned Court below is exorbitant and, therefore, the impugned judgment ought to be set aside. Mr. B. Mohanty (3), learned counsel appearing for the respondent -claimant, on the other hand, contended that the learned Court below has rightly passed the order after considering the evidence of both parties relating to the market value. Therefore, there is no illegality committed by the learned trial judge on determining the compensation amount.