AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. H. Deb, learned ASG appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. D. Bhattacharji, learned counsel appearing for the referring claimant-respondents. There is no representation for the respondent no.3, despite due notice from this court.
This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the judgment and award dated 23.04.2013 delivered in Misc. LA 01 of 2011 by the Land Acquisition Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur. By the notification under Section 17 of the LA Act and the declaration there from dated 01.12.2007, the land measuring 1.10 acres owned by the referring-claimants was acquired for extension of the Assam Rifles camp. The land pertains to three categories namely viti, nal and tilla. The Land Acquisition Collector after hearing the referring-claimants had determined the land value at Rs.50,000/- per kani for viti class of land, Rs. 48,000/- per kani for nal class of land and Rs.40,000/- per kani for tilla class of land. The acquired land is from Mouja- Dhawajanagar under Udaipur Sub Division and pertaining to Khatians no. 257, 1963 and 558 and plot nos. 2361/P, 2361/5258/P and 2360/P. Being aggrieved by the said determination, the referring-claimant-respondents pressed for reference under Section 18(1) of the LA Act to the Land Acquisition Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur. The said reference being Misc. LA 01 of 2011 was determined by the impugned judgment dated 23.04.2011 by enhancing the rate to Rs.4,00,000/- per kani, irrespective of the class of land.
Mr. Deb, learned ASG has raised two-fold objections against the said judgment and award viz. (i) the Land Acquisition Judge has failed to give rate according to the class of the land and (ii) the land exemplar which was relied on by the Land Acquisition Judge (Exhibit-1) cannot be the basis of determining the rate, as according to Mr. Deb, learned ASG, the said rate is the aggregate rate of various class of rate and secondly there is no evidence that the said land is in proximity to the acquired land. But Mr. Deb, learned ASG has fairly admitted that as the Requiring Department (the Assam Rifles), the appellant herein, did not adduce any evidence, oral or documentary and as such the appellant has no other evidence to pull in, but to rely on the evidence on records. What the appellant has to make out, he has to make out from the said evidence.
Mr. Bhattacharji, learned counsel has however pointed out that no attempt has been made by the Requiring Department to show that the said land measuring 2.30 acres covered by the Exhibit-1 was not in close proximity to the acquired land. On the contrary, it would be apparent that the exemplar land was very proximate to the acquired land as from the schedule of the land it can be comfortably gathered that the plot numbers, which are given in series, are not distant.
Be that as it may, this court has gone through the assessment note, prepared by the Land Acquisition Collector. From the paragraph 3 of the said assessment note, it appears that the Land Acquisition Collector considered the following deeds collected in the course of inquiry:
Sl No.
Plot No.
Class
Area in acres
Rate per kani
Deed No. & date
1.
761 &
786/5732
Panbaraj &
Viti (Tilla)
0.10
Rs.84,000/-
1-2024
26.08.2006
2.
2490/5672
Bastu (Tilla)
0.06
Rs.10,00,000/
-
1-2774
19.12.2007
3.
2446/3485
Viti
0.07
Rs.11,42857/-
1-2595
26.11.2007
4.
2641
Chara(Tilla)
0.06
Rs.8,00,000/-
1-2438
05.11.2007
5.
1026
Bastu
0.08
Rs.2,50,000/-
1-2626
29.11.2007
However, in the paragraph 3.1, the Land Acquisition Collector has observed, which part has been referred by Mr. Deb, learned ASG to submit that discarding of those sale exemplars was correct. Moreover, he has referred to paragraph 5 of the assessment note where the Land Acquisition Collector has recorded that the land was locally verified and surveyed for assessing the rate of the land and from that he had been able to ascertain the rate of the land what he had given by way of his award.
This court was not persuaded by the said observation. Even if, the observation made in the paragraph
3.1 of the assessment sheet is taken for granted, but so far the title deeds carrying the rate per kani at serial No. 2,3 and 4 are concerned, deduction for not being very nearer to the acquired land would be discernible. The rate per kani of the acquired land, if given at Rs. 4 lakh per kani cannot be said to be exorbitant and unreasonable.
Having observed thus, this court is of the view that this appeal is devoid of merit and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
Prepare the decree accordingly and send down the records.