Dukhi Shyam Rout (Since Dead) ... vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 12001 Ori

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
                               LAA NO.42 OF 2012

In the matter of an appeal under section 54 of the Land Acquisition
Act assailing the judgment dated 19.05.2012 passed by the
learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhawanipatna in L.A.R. No.70 of 2009.
                              .........

Dukhi Shyam Rout (since dead) through his L.Rs.) ::::: Appellants

-:: VERSUS ::-

Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lanjigarh Road, Junagarh Rail Link Project & Others :::: Respondents.

Advocate(s) who appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode:-

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Appellants :::: M/s.Sidhartha Das, P.R.

Singh and S.K. Mishra, Advocates

.For Respondent :::: M/s. Miss Kalpana Pattnaik & D. Rath, Advocates (for Respondent No.2) .........

PRESENT:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Hearing ::18.11.2021 :: Date of Judgment.23.11.2021

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. The Appellants by filing this Appeal under section 54

of the Land Acquisition Act (for short called as 'the L.A. Act') have

assailed the judgment/award dated 19.05.2012 passed by the

learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhawanipatna in L.A.R.

=2=

No.70 of 2009 in the matter of A reference under section 18 of the

L.A. Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Referral Court').

It may be stated here that the original claimant having died

during the proceeding before the Referral Court, his legal

representatives being prosecuted the proceeding before the

Referral Court and they have filed this Appeal and as such they

hereinafter being referred to as the Appellants (Claimants).

The land ad measuring Ac.05.31 decimals of Mouza-

Dunguriguda owned by the Appellants (Claimants) has been

acquired by the Respondents for the purpose of Lanjigarh Road-

Junagarh Rail Link project. The Land Acquisition Officer has

awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,053/- for the acquired lands.

The Appellants having received the said assessed compensation

under protest filed a petition seeking enhancement of the

compensation claiming therein that the market value of the land

as taken by the Land Acquisition Officer for the purpose of

assessment of the compensation is too low. They claimed that the

market value of the land acquired would be about Rs.3 to 4 lakhs

per acre. They further claimed that for the severance of the land

owned by them in a patch in view of the acquisition, they are also

entitled to sum of Rs. 2.00 lakhs which has not been taken into

account. In view of the demand raised by the Appellants

(Claimants) claiming higher compensation for their acquired land,

the matter stood referred to the Referral Court under section 18 of

the L.A Act for determination of just and proper consideration for =3=

said acquired land. The above claim of the Appellants was resistd

by the Respondents before the Referral Court.

The Appellants examined three witnesses. They have also

proved certain documents of which important are the two orders

passed by the same Referral Court on 11.12.1992 in MJC No. 31

of 1992 and the order passed by this Court in First Appeal No. 32

of 1992. The Respondents on the other hand have examined one

witness while proving the document i.e. the work sheet of that

village Dunguriguda.

2. The Referral Court going to determine the just and proper

compensation for the acquired land on the date of publication

under section 4(1) of the L.A. Act i.e. dated 17.8.1994 has finally

determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of

Rs.50,000/- per acre. Accordingly, the Respondents have been

directed to pay the compensation for the acquired land computing

the same at the said rate for the total extent of land acquired with

all other statutory benefits as available.

3. Learned counsel for the Appellants (Claimants) at the outset

inviting the attention of the court to the certified of the

judgment/award dated 31.7.2010 passed by the said Referral

Court in MJC No. 197 of 1997 as also the letter dated 9.9.2014

with the enclosure issued by the Respondent No. 1 in response to

the letter of the Appellants (Claimants) indicating therein that the

compensation for the acquired land involved in MJC No. 197 of

1997 and as has been determined by the Referral Court has =4=

already been paid to those claimants therein pointed that the

award as has been passed in the said case has been fully satisfied.

It may be stated here that said documents being filed in Court

have been taken on record.

Placing reliance of the above judgment/award passed by the

Referral Court prior to the passing of the judgment/award which

has been impugned in this Appeal and in view of the payment of

the said compensation amount, he contended that when the land

involved in the present proceeding had been acquired under the

same notification dated 17.8.1994 and as also those are of same

kissam and being similarly situated/located, the Appellants

(Claimants) are entitled at the minimum to the compensation in

consonance with the said determination of the compensation in

MJC No. 197 of 1997.

Inviting the attention to the factual settings of the present

case as well as the one involved in MJC No. 197 of 1997 as well as

concerning the case, he submitted that when in that case those

claimants have been paid with compensation being assessed,

taking the market value of the land at Rs.2,02,400/- per acre for

the Bahal kisam of land and Rs.96,000/- per acre for the other

kisams of lands i.e. Berna, Mala, Atta and Kheta Adi; the same

market value has to be taken as the guide for determination of the

compensation of the lands for these Appellants (Claimants)

involved in the present proceeding.

=5=

4. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 without disputing

the determination of the compensation for the land involved in

MJC No. 197 of 1997 and the factum of payment of the said

compensation to the Appellants-claimants therein as it reveals

from the certified copy of judgment/award contended that the said

market value as has been determined by the Referral Court in that

case has been on the basis of the evidence available on record

therein and that it is not permissible to determine the market

value of the acquired lands of the present Appellants (Claimants)

taking that as the basis.

5. Keeping in view the submission made, I have carefully gone

through the judgment/award dated 19.5.2012 which has been

impugned in the present Appeal as well as the judgment/award

passed in MJC No. 197 of 1997 disposed of on 31.7.2010. It

reveals that the land ad measuring Ac.5.31 decimals of Bahal,

Berena, Mala, Atta and Kheta Adi kissam under eight plots in one

khata of Mouza Dunguriguda owned by the Appellants have been

acquired by notification No. 36617/R dated 17.8.1994.

6. The reference under section 18 of the L.A. Act numbered as

MJC No. 197 of 1997 was concerning the land measuring Ac.05.75

decimals under nine plots in one khata of that very Mouza

Duguriguda. These lands had also been acquired pursuant to the

notification No. 36617/R dated 17.8.1994 and for the same

purpose of construction of Lanjigarh road-Junagarh Rail Link

project. In that case, the Referral Court has determined the market =6=

value of Ac.3.20 decimals of Bahal kisam of land at Rs.2,02,400/-

per acre and other kisams i.e. Berna, Mala, Atta, Kheta Adi at

Rs.96,000/- per acre. The undisputed position thus emerges that

almost same extent of lands of same kisams as involved in the

present reference were also the subject matter in the reference

answered on 31.7.2001 in MJC No. 197 of 1997. The documents

reveal that the judgment/award passed in MJC No. 197 of 1997

has been further challenged by this Respondent No. 2 and the

same has been fully satisfied by way of payment of the

compensation in terms of the determination made in the said

reference to the claimants therein.

Here is a case where the large chunk of land of different

kisams owned by the Appellants (Claimants) have been acquired

and thereby, it is well inferable that the Appellants (Claimants) by

such acquisition has not only lost their lands but also have been

deprived of that source of income for all times to come in future.

When other land owners of the village whose lands have been

acquired for the same purpose under the same notification have

been paid with the compensation at the enhanced rate as

aforestated, it does not stand to reason as to why the same

standard would not be applied for determining the compensation

towards the lands of the Appellants (Claimants) which have been

acquired and they be not paid accordingly.

In fact the statement governing the field in order to remove

the discriminatory treatment to the land loosers for the acquisition =7=

of the land under one notification is contained in the provision of

section 27(A) of the LA Act that even a land looser who has not

sought for the reference for enhancement of compensation would

be entitled to get similar treatment in the assessment of the

compensation for the acquisition of his land and payment thereof

if the compensation is determined at a higher rate in a reference

made at the instance of another land looser whose lands have been

acquired under the same notification in case, he moves the

Competent Authority within thirty days of passing of the award in

the reference provided of course, the land are of same quality and

attached with same benefits etc. The Appellants (Claimants) since

are pursuing the matter of enhancement of compensation by

carrying Appeal challenging the judgment/award stating that the

determination of market value has been made on a lower side and

compensation awarded is thus liable to be enhanced; this Court

finds all the reasons to extent the same benefit to the present

Appellants (Claimants) in the matter of determination of

compensation for their acquired land and payment thereof in

consonance with the determination of the compensation as has

been made in MJC No. 197 of 1997 and paid to the claimants

therein.

7. In that view of the matter, this Court holds that the

Appellants (Claimants) are entitled to get the compensation for

Bahal kisam of land at Rs. 2,02,400/- per acre and rest kisams of

lands at the rate of Rs. 96,000/- per acre. The Compensation for =8=

the extent of acquired land being computed in the aforesaid rate be

paid to the Appellants (Claimants) with all other statutory benefits

as available within four months hence failing which the same

would carry further interest @ 9% per annum till payment.

8. Accordingly, the Appeal stands disposed of.

9. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances, it is felt

necessary in the interest of justice to direct the Referral Court that

upon deposit of the amount as aforesaid by the Respondents; 80%

of the same would be kept in unecumberable and non-pledgeable

long term Fixed Deposit of ten years at the minimum in the name

of the Appellants (Claimants) upon due apportionment amongst

them in accordance with their shares in any Nationalized Bank

with monthly interest payable to them through their Savings Bank

Accounts and the rest 20% shall be paid to the Respondents

(claimants) by keeping the same in deposit in their Savings Bank

Accounts in the said Bank where the Fixed deposit would be kept.

..........................

D. Dash, J.

Aks