Chief Executive Engineer vs Radha Rani Mondal And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 2836 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Chief Executive Engineer vs Radha Rani Mondal And Others on 8 April, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                        F. A. No. 166 of 2009
   Chief Executive Engineer, Damodar Valley Corporation, Dhanbad
                                                         ... ... Appellant
                               Versus
   Radha Rani Mondal and Others                       ... ... Respondents
                                With
                         F.A. No. 167 of 2009
   Chief Executive Engineer, Damodar Valley Corporation, Dhanbad
                                                         ... ... Appellant
                               Versus
   Radha Rani Mondal and Others                     ... ... Respondents
                                With
                         F.A. No. 146 of 2010
    Executive Engineer, Damodar Valley Corporation, Dhanbad
                                                         ... ... Appellant
                               Versus
    Radha Rani Mondal and Others                  ... ... Respondents

                         ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Appellant : Mr. Srijit Choudhary, Advocate Mr. Aayush Ojha, Advocate Mr. Chiranjevv Mahto, Advocate Ms. Tanya Rai, Advocate [in all cases] For the Respondents : Ms. Aditee Dongrawat, Advocate [in all cases]

---

th 26/8 April 2026

1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant in all these cases.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no cogent material was brought on record on the part of the claimant to seek enhancement of compensation. He submits that once the compensation was fixed, it was for the claimant to place cogent material on record to demonstrate that the compensation was fixed at lower rate other than market value.

3. The learned counsel has also submitted that in the impugned judgment, there is a reference of sale deed No. 5591 and from the records, it appears that said sale deed is dated 01.08.2003 is relatable to Mouza Pandra and consideration amount was Rs. 25,000/- for transfer of 4½ decimals of land. He submits that the mouza in F.A. No. 166 of 2009 is Mouza Punai @ Kashitand and there is no material to suggest that Mouza Kashitand was adjoining to the said Mouza Pandra. The learned counsel has also submitted that it has come in evidence that the claimants were selling the land at higher rate, but the sale deed Ext.-1 was not executed by any of the claimants.

4. In F.A. No. 166 of 2009, the village is Kashitand which is also the situation in F.A. No. 167 of 2009. So far as F.A. No. 146/2009 is concerned, the name of Mouza is Palurdih.

5. The land involved in all these cases fall within police station Nirsa.

6. In order to further clarify the factual aspect of the matter and at the request of the learned counsel for the appellant, the matters are directed to be listed for further hearing tomorrow i.e. 9th April 2026.

7. Let these matters be treated as part heard.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 08.04.2026 Mukul/-