Paradeep Phosphates Vs Land Acquisition

Heard Mr. S.K. Parhi, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Appellant, Mr. S.K. Jee, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State and Mr. K.K. Jena, learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 to 60. Common notes on behalf of Appellant in the present appeal and connected appeals filed in Court be kept in record.

¶12

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Company challenging Judgment dtd.23.04.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Jagatsinghpur in L.A. Case No. 315 of 1990.

¶13

Vide the said Judgment learned court below held the Private Respondents entitled to get compensation @ Rs.60,000/- per acre. Learned court below also held the Respondents entitled to statutory solatium @ 30% per annum and interest @ 9% per annum for the 1^st year from the date of acquisition and @ 15% per annum for the subsequent years till the payment of the excess amount of

¶14

Page 1 of 4.

¶15

compensation is made. The court below also held the Respondents entitled additional market value @ 12% from the date of notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act till the date of possession with interest as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Amendment Act.

¶16

4.1. However, in course of hearing basing on the notes submitted in the present appeal along with the connected appeals, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Appellant-Company contended that the matter has been settled amicably in between the Appellant and the Private Respondents in the present appeal as well as connected appeals with the following terms and conditions:-

¶17

“i) That the compensation amount shall be Rs.45,000/- per acre. An amount of Rs.15,000/- per acre has already been paid by virtue of the order passed by Land Acquisition Officer.

¶18

ii) That the balance amount of Rs.30,000/- per acre with additional solatium and interest as applicable, as per the statute, shall be paid to the Respondent/Claimants.

¶19

iii) That the Additional amount shall be deposited with the Executing Court by the appellant company-PPL within a months. period of two months.

¶20

iv) The Executing Court shall disburse the same to the Claimants/Respondents/ Legal heirs on proper identification. The award of the Civil Court shall be modified to the extent indicated above and instead of Rs.60,000/- per acre (as per the award), it shall be Rs. 45,000/- per acre.

¶21

v) That the Land Acquisition proceedings which have already been finalised by the Civil Court and has attained finality shall not be reopened on the basis of the consent order.

¶22

Page 2 of 4.

¶23

4.2. Learned Sr. Counsel accordingly contended that since the matter has been settled out of Court with the aforesaid terms and conditions, all these appeals be disposed of in the light of such compromise so arrived at in between the Parties.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the Private Respondents on the other hand also accepted the settlement so produced in Court by the learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Appellant in the present appeal and connected appeals. But learned counsel appearing for Private Respondents contended that taking into account the pendency of the appeals and the suffering meted out to the Respondents/land loosers, some cost be awarded in addition to the entitlements to be received in terms of the compromise.

¶25

Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Appellant contended that this Court in addition to the terms and conditions effected for settlement, may pass appropriate order with regard to claim by the learned counsel appearing for Private Respondents in the present appeal and the connected appeals also.

¶26

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and taking into account the compromise effected in between the Parties out of Court so reflected in the note, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present appeal in terms of the compromise so effected. In addition to the terms and conditions indicated in the compromise, this Court allows cost of Rs.10,000/- in total in favour of the legal heirs of the original land loosers in the present appeal and the connected batch of appeals to be paid by the Appellant-Company along with the entitlements to be arrived at in terms of the compromise.

¶27

Page 3 of 4.

¶28

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

¶29

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

¶30

Sneha

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 09-Dec-2024 19:14:14

¶33

Page 4 of 4.

Paradeep Phosphates v. Land Acquisition

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paradeep Phosphates v. Land Acquisition

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra S.Pradhani Vs State

Mohan Pradhani Vs State

B.M.,New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs Mungai Bhatra

Paradeep Phosphates Vs L.A. Collector

Paradeep Phosphates Vs L.A. Collector

Paradeep Phosphates Vs L.A. Collector