UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAJ KARAN JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is directed against the judgment dated 6.10.2010 rendered by the Land Acquisition Judge, West Tripura, Agartala (Court No.2) in case No. Misc. (LA)26/2005 declaring that the respondent no.1 is entitled to Rs.1(one) lac per kani based on the proximate date of sale instances as well as from the guess-work along with 30% solatium over the valuation of the said land as per provision of Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (herein after referred to as the 'L A Act') and also declaring that there shall be increase @12% on the market value as provided under Section 23 (1-A) of the LA Act from the date of notification till the date of award and also interest @ 9% per annum under Section 28 of the LA Act from the date of taking over possession for a period of one year and l5% interest per annum till the date of enhanced amount of compensation i.e. the amount awarded.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, facts leading to filing of this appeal are that the land measuring 1.88 acres covered under Khatian No.355/1 comprising C.S.plot No.725 of Mauza Narsh-inghar. under Gandhigram T.K of Sadar Sub-Division was acquired by the Land Acquisition Collector on requisition made by the Boarder Security Force Authorities for the construction of Bhagalpur B.O.P. BSF under Sadar Sub-Division, in West Tripura vide notification No.F 9(24).REV/Acq/6/201 dated 01.10.2001 under Section 4 of the L.A.Act and subsequent declaration vide No. F/9/(24) REV/ACQ/6/201 dated 7.12.2001 under Section 6 of the Act whereunder the L.A. Collector assessed the value of the land at the rate of Rs.9500/- per kani and also assessed 30 % solitium and l2% additional interest and Rs.10,000/- for trees i.e. in total an amount of Rs.71,349/- as compensation in favour of the respondent No.1.

(3.) MR. P K Biswas, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the finding of the learned L.A.Judge enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs.9500/- per kani to Rs. 1 (one) lac per kani are based on mere surmise and conjecture and against the evidence on record inasmuch as the sale deeds as produced by the claimant-respondent No.1 are not pertaining to land of similar nature and character and many of the documents are not contemporaneous on the basis of which correct assessment could not be made and just compensation cannot be awarded. Moroever, the land as referred to in the sale deeds as produced by the claimant respondent No.1 are not situated near the land under acquisition but inspite of that the learned L.A.Judge came to conclusion that there is no alternative but to hold that the market value of the land might be at the rate of Rs.1 lac per kani which is a mere guesswork based on no reality and as such the impugned judgment awarding the compensation is liable to be set aside and quashed.