EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TOWNSHIP DIVISION, BBMB Vs. GAJAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of the regular first appeal filed by the appellant under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act ')/against the award passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi, dated 7.10.2005, whereby the market value of the land, as fixed by the Collector, was enhanced. This judgment shall also dispose of the cross -objections filed by respondent No. 1 for enhancement of the compensation.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that a Notification was issued by the State Government under Section 4 of the Act on 3.5.1996 for acquisition of land in Village Bharjwanoo, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi for the purpose of protection of cause way -cum -submersible bridge at Suketi Khad in Tehsil Sundernagar. The land of respondent No. 1 was also acquired by way of this notification issued, which measured 2 -15 -6 Bigha, situated in village Bharjwanoo, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi. The Collector entered into the reference and on conclusion of the proceedings, he gave an award vide which the compensation was awarded to respondent No. 1 at the rate of Rs. 14,422/ - per Bigha alongwith other compulsory charges etc. Respondent No. 1 filed a petition under Section 18 of the Act before the Court of the learned District Judge for enhancement of the compensation. The learned District Judge, vide his impugned award, enhanced the compensation to Rs. 1.00 lac per bigha. Being aggrieved, the appellant has come up in appeal before this Court.

(3.) THE submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellant were that the compensation has been enhanced by the Court of the learned District Judge ignoring the evidence and the compensation awarded by the Collector was just and reasonable, which deserved no enhancement. It was also submitted that various factors are required to be looked into while determining the market value of the land on the date of acquisition, which have not been considered by the learned trial Court in its true spirit and, therefore, the appeal deserves to be allowed accordingly.