ACHUYTANANDA PATI Vs. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant is the claimant in all the four cases. The claimant has filed these appeals against the award passed by the learned Sub -Judge, Second Court, Cuttack in L.A. Case Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 of 1990 in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Since the lands acquired were under same notification and the claimant is same in all the appeals are taken together for hearing.

(2.) THE lands of the Appellant -claimant have been acquired for construction Flood Embankment in the River Chitratpola in village Manikapur, P.S. Salipur in the district of Cuttack. The areas involved -in the aforesaid cases are Ac. 0.07 dec. of Bagayat Kissam, Ac. 0.13 dec. of Patita and Gharabari Kissam, Ac. 0.13 dec. of Baunsabari and Bari and Ac. 0.60 dec. of Patita and Biali land respectively. The Land Acquisition Collector has determined the market value of the land at Rs. 6,000/ - per acre for all type of land and he has after taking into consideration the standing trees including the price of the land determined the compensation at Rs. 357.85 p., Rs. 642.86 p., Rs. 889.41 P. and Rs. 291.50 p. respectively. The claimant received the said amount on protest. Being aggrieved by the valuation determined by the Land Acquisition Collector, the claimant filed his objection for higher compensation, which was referred to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector filed his counter to the said objection. The claimant adduced evidences in support of his higher compensation and the referral Court after taking into consideration, the evidence available on record, determined the compensation vide award dated 22.9.1990 as follows:

(3.) THE learned Counsel appearing tor the claimant has submitted that after the remand the claimant has adduced evidence in respect of the Bamboo clumps to determine the age and number of Bamboo as earlier no materials available on record in that regard. He also adduced documentary evidence as no contemporaneous documents are available to determine the valuation of the land. He has also argued to grant the benefits to the claimant as per the Amendment Act, 1884. The claimant adduced evidence explaining the age of the Bamboo clumps and its number and also filed certified copy of the judgment passed in L.A. Case No. 1/1986 where the referral Court has passed the award on the basis of the sale deed, i.e. contemporaneous document for the land acquired in the vicinity of the land acquired in the present case. The State has not preferred any appeal against that award. Since the land acquired in the present case the notification made was within one year, the award passed in L.A. Case No. 1/1986 has some basis to determine the valuation of the land in the present case. The learned Court below had not considered the said fact and the Land Acquisition Collector has not adduced any rebuttal evidence to discard the evidence adduced by the claimant.