HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra IVIishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ. APPELLANTS RESPONDENT F.A.{M)No.33of2008 State of CG and another Versus Santram ^ JUDGMENT FOR CONSIDERATiON Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge HON'BLE SHRI R.N. CHANDRAKAR. J ^3 ouy^u^- Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge POST FOR JUDGMENT ON j ^ -6-2010 Sd/- a t. h HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR First Appeal (M) No.33 of 2008 n7' APPELLANTO): Non-Applicants RESPONDENT: Applicant 1. 2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Collector, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. The Land Acquisition Officer, District Janjgir-Champa. Chhattisgarh. Through : The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Minimata Bango Canal Division No.6, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) Versus Santram, S/o Laxman Satnami, R/o Village Chhitapadariya, Patwari Halka No.01, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir- Champa (CG) Preseni: Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Addl. Advocate General with Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Dy. Advocate General for the State/appellants. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, counsel for the respondent. Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. JUDGMENT (Delivered on)t<AJune, 2010) The following judgment of the Court was delivered by Dhirendra Mishra, J. 1. The State has preferred this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 29th March, 2007 passed in Misc. Civil Suit No.60/06, whereby learned Additional District Judge, Sakti, Distt. Janjgjr-Champa., on a reference under Sectton 18(2) of the Act at the instance of respondent-land owner, has enhanced the amount of compensation payableto the respondent towards acquisition of his land @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal and also held that the respondent is entitled for solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% p.a. from 31st January, 2003, the date of publication of notification. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the respondent is owner of Khasra No.95/1, area 3.06 acres at Village-Chhitapadariya, Tahsil-Jaijaipur, Distt. '-^.. \ 2/ y Janjgir-Champa. 90 decimal of the above land was acquired for the purposes of construction of Distributory Canal by the Water Resources Department of the State Government. The Land Acquisjtion Officer (in short "LAO") treating the acquired land as agricultural land, calculated compensation payable to the respondent at Rs. 1 ,20,649/-. 3. However, learned Additional District Judge, on reference under Section 18(2) of the Act, enhanced the compensation and held that the respondent is entitled for compensation @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal as the land in question is situated near housing site and school and owners of the land in the vicinity have been awarded compensation @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal in the case of Kumari Kalpana and others, and Nepal Singh and others. 4. Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for the State/appellants, argued that the land in question is, admittedly, recorded as agricultural land in the revenue record, however, compensation has been awarded by treating the acquired land as residential plot. Agricultural land can be diverted only as per provisions of the Land Revenue Code and in the absence of any diversion order, the Reference Court was not justified in awarding compensation @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal. Even interest @ 12% is too excessive, considering the prevailing rate of interest at present. 5. On the other hand., Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent-owner, would argue that the LAO on the basis of evidence of the Halka Patwari held that the acquired land was frt for residential accommodation, however, awarded compensation arbitranly of Rs.1,20,649/- against the land acquired, whereas the Tehsildar and the Halka Patwari had categorically recommended that compensation should be awarded @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal as per prevailing market rate. The Reference Court, on the basis of report of the Tehsildar, assessed compensation @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal. As per Collector's guideline, price ofthe residential plot was to be fixed @ Rs.10200/- per decimal, however, the learned Reference Court considering the size of the plot, assessed compensation on the basis of prevailing market rate @ Rs. 3,500/- per decimal. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order as also the award passed by the LAO. t7l/ 7. The Reference Court on the basis of evidence of Halka Patwari and the revenue records proved by him and further considering that the lands belonging to Nepal Singh, Mrityunjai, Bhaiya Singh, Budheshwar & Kumari Kalpana were also acquired for the purposes of construction of canal and compensation was awarded to them by treating their land as agricultural land fit for accommodation purposes @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal and that the land in question is adjacent to the land of Kumari Kalpana, held that the respondent is also entitled for compensation of his tand @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal. Therefore, in our considered opinion, award of compensation by the Reference Court @ Rs.3,500/- per decimal is strictly based on the material available on record and the same does not call for any interference. Similarly, award of solatium @ 30% on the above sum is also strictly in accordance with law and needs no interference. However, considering the prevailing market rate at present, award of interest @ 12% per annum is excessive and simple interest @ 9% per annum would meet theends ofjustice. tt 8. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order is modifled to the extent that the respondent shall be entitied for interest @ 9% p.a., instead of 12% p.a., on the amount not paid to the respondent from 31 January, 2003 till the date of realization. 9. No order as to costs. _^^--——, Sd/-. DhirendraMishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge '^