Splo.Land Acq.Office Vs Lakshman Ku.Meher

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

¶2

L.A.A. No.77 of 2009

¶3

Special Land Acquisition Officer, Talcher-Sambalpur Rail Line through Collector, Sambalpur ....... Appellant

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

Lakshman Kumar Meher & another

¶6

....... Respondents

¶7

For Appellant : Mr. T. Pattanaik,
Addl. Standing Counsel
For Respondents : None
----------------------------
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Hearing & Judgment: 07.02.2024
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶8

S.K. Mishra, J . This Appeal has been preferred by the State-

¶9

Appellant, challenging the order dated 10^th July, 2008 passed in

¶10

L.A. Misc. Case No.177 of 1993, vide which the Court below enhanced the compensation amount from Rs.400/- per decimal to Rs.1000/- per decimal for Ac.0.050 decimals of Atta Sadharan in kisam of land and directed to pay the said amount along with additional compensation @ 12% per annum on the above excess amount for the period commencing from the date

¶11

of publication of the notification under section 4(1) of the Act till the date of the award or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. Further, it was directed that the present Respondents are entitled to get solatium @ 30% and interest on the enhanced amount @ 9% per annum for one year from the date on which the possession of the land was taken over and interest @ 15% per annum for the rest period till the date of payment. It was further directed that the amount which has already been paid to the present Respondents, shall be

¶12

deducted and the balance amount shall be paid to them.

¶13

2. The brief background facts, which led to filing of this Appeal, are that the State Government has acquired the land measuring Ac.0.050 pertaining to Plot No.1033, Khata No.26/g of Mouza Sarala pursuant to declaration No.36419 dated 16.07.1992 published in the Extraordinary Gazette dated 27.08.1992 from the Respondents for the purpose of construction of City Railway Station, Sambalpur. After considering the relevant factors so also the market value of the acquired land, the LAO has paid a sum of Rs.2804.40 paise towards compensation including all statutory benefits. Being dissatisfied with the awarded amount, the Respondents raised objection and ultimately the aforesaid objection was referred to

¶14

L.A.A. No.77 of 2009

¶15

Page 2 of 5

¶16

the Civil Court for determination under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

¶17

3. It is the further case of the Appellant that the Court below, without considering the materials available on record in its true prospective, arbitrarily fixed the market value of the said acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre (Rs.1000/per decimal). Being aggrieved by the said enhancement of compensation by the Court below, the State has preferred the

¶18

present Appeal.

¶19

4. Mr. T. Pattanaik, learned Additional Standing

¶20

Counsel for the State/Appellant, drawing attention to para-9 of the impugned order submits, though the Court below observed that there is no material before it that the acquired land is situated adjacent to the land sold under Ext.1 or the piece of land which was the subject matter in L.A. Misc. Case No.49 of 1993 (Ext.2), the Court below still enhanced the compensation amount to Rs.1,00,000/- per acre.

¶21

5. In view of such submission made by the learned state counsel , on perusal of the impugned order, it is ascertained that the Court below , while enhancing the compensation amount, did not take into consideration Exts.1 & 2, based on which the Respondents had claimed for enhancement of the

¶22

L.A.A. No.77 of 2009

¶23

Page 3 of 5

¶24

compensation amount @ Rs.3,00,000/- per acre (Rs.3,000/- per decimal). Rather, the Court below enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/- per acre (Rs.1,000/- per decimal) taking into consideration the oral evidence on record with the following observations:

¶25

“ The Petitioner has admitted that at the time of purchase of the land it was being used as an agricultural land. He filled up the ditches existing on the plot by earth and made it fit for residential purpose. Admittedly, the acquired land is situated within the Municipality area where upon the railway authority have constructed the City Railway station. Since the petitioner had purchased the land at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre to years to the date of acquisition, so it would not be appropriate to enhance the price to Rs. Three lakh per acre and direct the Opp. Parties to pay compensation at the above rate. But at the same time it would also not be appropriate to say that the petitioner is not entitled to get any amount excess than that already has been paid to him. He had purchased the land for residential purpose and had converted the standard of the land from agricultural land to residential land. Keeping in mind the above fact I think it will

¶26

L.A.A. No.77 of 2009

¶27

Page 4 of 5

¶28

be just and appropriate to fix the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.one lakh per acre. Hence ordered.”

¶29

(Emphasis supplied)

¶30

5. In view of the evidence on record so also

¶31

observations made by the Court below, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Court below.

¶32

6. Accordingly, the Appeal stands dismissed.

¶33

7. As the Appeal stands dismissed, the Appellant is

¶34

directed to act in terms of the impugned Judgment dated 10^th

¶35

July, 2008 passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.177 of 1993 within a period of eight weeks hence.

¶36

8. Since despite notice the Respondents remained

¶37

absent, Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Court below so also the private Respondents.

¶38

…….….……………………

¶39

S.K. MISHRA, J.

¶40

High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

¶41

The 7^th February, 2024 /Prasant

¶42

Signature Not Verified

¶43

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 20-Feb-2024 14:41:04

¶44

L.A.A. No.77 of 2009

¶45

Page 5 of 5

Splo.Land Acq.Office v. Lakshman Ku.Meher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Splo.Land Acq.Office v. Lakshman Ku.Meher

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

Lily Padhy@Runu Padhy Vs Kamal Singh

Rama Ch.Pandab Vs State and Ors.

Sangram Keshari Khun Vs Uco Bank

Draupadi Das Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Kumar Choudhury Vs Orissa State Ware Housing Corporation, Bbsr

Rama Ch.Dash Vs State and Ors.