L A COLLECTOR Vs. SUKUMAR BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act arises from an award passed by the learned Land Acquisition Judge, North Tripura District, Kailashahar, in Misc. (L.A.) Case No. 13 of 1988.

(2.) A polt of land measuring 0'198 acres pertaining to C.S. polt No.308/7578 of Kailashahar town was acquired by the Government of Tripura by Notification No. 9(8)ACG/REV/II/85 dated 28.2.1986 for the purpose of utilising this land for protection of Rangauti Gopinathpur Embankment. The Land Acquisition Collector in his award determined compensation @Rs. 37,500/-per acre, Dissatisfied there with, the appellants sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the Civil Court (L.AJudge). learned Land Acquisition Judge, in his award and decree dated 23rd December, 1989 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 30,000/-per kani which otherwise denotes Rs. 75,000/- per acre. The Land Acquisition Collector, dissatisfied with the award of Reference Court, has preferred this appeal.

(3.) It is the settled principle of law that in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, when proceedings are taken under Section 20 of the Act, the burden is always on the claimant like a plaintiff to adduce adequate and acceptable evidence to enable the Court to determine proper and just compensation for the acquired land. The claimant is to prove that the lands under acquisition are comparable with the land under the sale deeds relied upon in respect of value, nature and price. If such evidence is adduced , the buren shifts on the state to disprove it.