Nanda Ram Alias Nand Lal vs Union Of India
2001 Latest Caselaw 92 Del

ORDER

Devinder Gupta, J.

1. This is an appeal under, Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" seeking determination of the amount of compensation.

2. Claimant's land was acquired for public purpose, namely, Ash disposal and Railway Siding Badarpur Thermal Power Project at public expense through notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act on 12.6.1969. Along with claimant's land, other lands situate at village Jaitpur were also notified for being acquired for the same public purpose. Collector Land Acquisition had earlier made his award No. 26/70/-71. Claimant's land could not be included in the earlier award, therefore, supplementary award No. 26-B/70-71 was made by the Collector offering compensation at the rate of Rs. 2500/- per bigha. Feeling dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, reference was sought by the claimant. The Reference Court through the impugned judgment dated 29/10.1985 held that the market value of the land as on the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was Rs. 2,500/- per bigha. Accordingly, he proceeded to make his award. In other words the market value, as determined by the Collector Land Acquisition was affirmed by the Reference Court. Feeling dissatisfied, instant appeal was filed seeking further enhancement in the amount of compensation at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per bigha.

3. The grievance of the appellant made in the appeal is that the land in question was allotted to him on 14.9.1973 and it was on 17.9.1979 that he received a notice from the Collector Land Acquisition. As such it would not be correct to say that his land was acquired in 1969. The land was allotted to the appellant in 1973, therefore, there cannot be any question of its being acquired in the year 1969. Accordingly, the entire basis for determining the amount of compensation is bad. The appellant has thus claimed further enhancement at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per bigha.

4. We have gone through the record of the Reference Court of LAC No. 280/83 titled as Nanda Ram alias Nand Lal v. Union of India. No where in the petition seeking reference the claimant/appellant had set up the case, as has been projected in the Memorandum of Appeal presented in this Court. It was not agitated by him before the Reference Court that the land was not acquired through notification issued on 6.1.1969. The supplementary award itself suggest that the claimant had filed his claim dated 12.10.1969 making prayer that his land should be assessed at the rate of Rs. 3,500/- per bigha. Therefore, now to assert that the land was not acquired through notification issued on 6.1.1969 but was acquired later on is nothing but an after thought. Moreover, issues were framed on 24.7.1984. Claimant was called upon to lead evidence. No evidence was led by the claimant except by tendering a copy of judgment Ex. A1. The Collector in his award had categorised claimant's land in Block-C and relying upon the judgment of this Court in RFA No. 41/76 ( Sabharai v. Union of India) decided the reference on 14.2.1979 fixed the market value at Rs. 2,500/- per bigha. There is no reason that why in the case of the appellant the judgment of this Court in Sabharai's case (supra) be not applied wherein fair market value was assessed at Rs. 2,000/- per bigha for similar lands.

5. Since there is no material on record to come to a different conclusion then the one arrived at by the Reference court, there is no force in the appeal, which is liable to be dismissed. Needless to add that no material was either produced by the appellant before the Reference Court that his land was wrongly categorised in Block-C. The Collector as well as the Reference Court placed reliance, for determination of the amount of compensation, upon the judgment of this Court in Sabharai's case (supra), in which case also the land was acquired under the same notification for the same public purpose.

6. Dismissed.