(1.) Two short questions arise upon this appeal which is as to the amount of compensation awarded by the Second Subordinate Judge of Hughly under the Land Acquisition Act, The questions arise, first, as to the value of the land, and, secondly, as to the value of the trees upon the land. The land acquired was about 3 bighas, 6 cottahs and 7 chittacks. The Land Acquisition Deputy Collector awarded, compensation at the rate of Rs. 500, per bigha for firm land, Rs. 250 a bigha for some tank land and Rs. 393 as the Value of trees, The Subordinate Judge has increased that compensation. He has given Rs. l,200 per bigha for firm land. Rs. 500 per bigha for the tank land and Rs. 1,187 as market-value of the trees. Both parties were dissatisfied and both have appealed.
(2.) The Secretary of State says that upon the claimant's own showing the land was worth only Its. 800 a bigha, and that the principle upon which the Subordinate Judge has proceeded in assessing the compensation to be paid for the trees was wrong, as the practical effect of that principle is that the claimant is getting paid twice over.
(3.) The claimant says that instead of Rs. 1,200 a bigha given him for the land the ought to get at the rate of Rs. 1,500 a bigha, and that any way if he was only entitled to Rs. 1,200 a bigha for firm land, he ought to get as regards the tank land at the rate of Rs. 600 a bigha being half that given for the land itself according to a generally recognised principle of assessment in these Courts.