LAWS(PAT)-2014-3-51

PATALO DEVI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On March 28, 2014
Patalo Devi Appellant
V/S
THE STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are aggrieved by an order dated 21.11.2006 passed by learned Special Land Acquisition Judge-III, Patna, whereby he has rejected an application filed by the petitioners under Sections 114, 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the judgment dated 4.4.1990, in view of the amendment in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") introduced by Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. I have heard Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sanjay Pandey, learned Government Pleader No. 21 appearing on behalf of the State-Respondents. On a request made by this Court, Mr. Pushkar Narayan Shahi, learned Additional Advocate General No. 14 has given valuable assistance to this Court for proper adjudication of the case. This court places on record deep appreciation for his assistance extended by Mr. Shahi.

(2.) Facts are short and are not much in dispute. The petitioners' land at Mauza-Murarpur and Abdul Rahmanpur was acquired by the Respondent State of Bihar for construction of a marketing-yard. A notification to that effect under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") was issued and accordingly award was passed, without adding interest and solatium thereon. Being aggrieved by the award of Special Land Acquisition Collector, Marketing Board, Patna, the petitioners along with other landholders filed an application for reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Act, objecting to the amount of compensation granted to these petitioners. The case was accordingly referred to and registered as L.A. Case No. 317 of 1979, in the Court of learned Special Land Acquisition Judge-III, Patna.

(3.) Learned Special Land Acquisition Judge-III, Patna, decided the reference vide his judgment dated 4.4.1990 allowing solatium at the rate of 15% on the amount of compensation determined and interest at the rate of 6% per annum and award was drawn up on such terms.