GOVERNMENT OF BANGLADESH Vs. ABDUR RASHID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question of law involved in this appeal is when land is acquired under section 93 A of the Town Improvement Act and in the absence of Tribunal constituted thereunder, whether the Land Acquisition Court in assessing compensation in terms of section 93A (5) (b) (ii) read with 91A of the Act is competent to direct for payment of interest on the compensation assessed.

(2.) Facts are that the land recorded in C. S. Plot Nos. 59, 60, 89 and 90 measuring 2.55 acres of land of Mouza Bhola under P.S.Tejgaon, District Dacca of the respondents were requisitioned on January 27, 1969 and its possession was taken over on the same date by the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca under sub-section (1) of section 93A of the Town Improvement Act, 1953. The land was subsequently acquired on June 23, 1969 after serving notices on the respondents on April 30, 1960 as required under sub-section (4) (a) and (b) of section 93A of the Act. The Deputy Commissioner, Dacca, assessed compensation of the lands at Tk. 8,286-12 but the respondents did not accept. They made an application for arbitration before the Tribunal in terms of section 91A of the Act for determination of the compensation claiming much higher rates. In the absence of the Tribunal set up under the said Act, the Land Acquisition Court set up with the Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Dacca under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 acted as the Arbitrator in the case. The claim was contested by the then Government of East Pakistan contending that the claim was highly inflated; that the Deputy Commissioner awarded a fair and reasonable amount of compensation having regard to the quality of the land, the situation and all other advantages and disadvantages thereof, according to law prevailing at the time of final acquisition. The Land Acquisition Court by an order dated July 5, 1968 determined the compensation at Tk. 32,076/00 which included a sum of Tk. 4,765/00 as compensation for some trees and plants standing on the land. The Land Acquisition Court directed the payment of interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the compensation if not paid within the date fixed in the award. As against that award there was an appeal before the High Court being F.A. No. 262 of 1969 which was allowed in part. Leave was granted to consider the question set out above.

(3.) The learned Judges of the High Court Division with reference to the decision of this Division in the case of Bangladesh vs. Abdul Mannan (1977) 29 DLR (S.C.) 17 held that the Land Acquisition Court holds the power of granting interest on the compensation assessed. It is being challenged by the Additional Attorney-General appearing for the Government appellant. On finding the importance of the question involved we required the assistance of an amicus curiae and requested Mr. T. H. Khan to render his assistance to this Division and had the advantage of hearing a very learned argument on the exposition of the law.