TRINATH SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff is the appellant against a confirming judgment.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that he is an Ex-Army personnel. After retirement from Indian Army, he applied for settlement of some lands in his favour as per the policy of the Government. Accordingly, the suit schedule land was settled in his favour. The final record of right was published in the year 1966 in his name. He was in possession of the land. He used to pay rent. The suit land was surrounded by reserved forest. On the south, there was a footpath leading to the schedule land. The same was the only access to the schedule land. While the matter stood thus, the Government of Orissa acquired the suit land for construction of Raghunath Sagar Minor Irrigation Project and took advance possession of the same on 1.1.1973. He signed the agreement to that effect and was instructed not to go to the suit land. He awaited to receive the compensation. Subsequently by notification dated 1.6.1976, a sum of Rs.3,2471.01 paise was sanctioned for payment of compensation to him and another for the compulsory acquisition of area Ac.20.56 cents, out of which area of Ac.14.540 decimals belongs to him. He was entitled to Rs.22,963.44 paise towards compensation. The amount was not paid. In January, 1977, he was informed by the Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization (Southern Range), Berhampur, defendant no.3, that the suit land was not submerged under the water of the Raghunath Sagar Minor Irrigation Project and as such no compensation was payable to him. It was further pleaded that by virtue of the compulsory acquisition of land, he was entitled to certain amenities. The same had been denied to him. He tried to take possession of the suit land and raise crops, but the same was futile. The defendants informed him to attend the spot inspection from the year 1977 till 1980. During summer months of the year 1983, the Aska Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Aska had sanctioned a loan of Rs.6,000/- for excavating a tank in the schedule land for the purpose of pisciculture. The land was mortgaged. He reared fish. During rainy season, water of Raghunath Sagar overflowed as a result of which the southern side of the tank was damaged. He sustained huge loss. With this factual scenario, he instituted the suit in the court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Aska claiming damages @ Rs.7000/- per annum from 1983 to 1986 amounting to Rs.21,000/- with interest @12% and for a direction to the defendants to lay an approach road to the suit schedule land for access to the suit land.

(3.) Pursuant to issuance of summons, the defendants entered appearance and filed written statement denying the assertions made in the plaint. The case of the defendants is that for excavation of Raghunath Sagar Minor Irrigation Project advance possession of the land in the year 1973 was taken after preliminary survey with a condition to pay compensation. When the project was in verge of completion, it was found that the land of the plaintiff was at higher level of the project. Accordingly the plaintiff was informed to take back the possession and the land was released in January, 1977. The defendants denied the allegation with regard to the loan incurred by the plaintiff and rearing of fish. The land was suitable for cultivation and the same can be approached by footpath.