^v HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. APPELLANTS RESPONDENTS F.A.(M)No.29of2008 State of CG and another Versus Pooran Chand Agrawal and others JUDGMENT FOR CONSIDERATION HON'BLE SHRI R.N. CHANDRAKAR. J 3 cu^jej^ Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge POST FOR JUDGMENT ON ) Lf -6-2010 Sd/- '^ t \^^y ^^^f^~' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR First Appeal (M) No.29 of 2008 APPELLANTfS): Non-Applicants 1. 2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Collector, District Janjgir Champa, (C.G.). The Land Acquisition Officer, Hasdeo Bango Project, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. Versus RESPONDENTS: Applicants 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Pooran Chand Agrawal, S/o Late Shri Mohanlal Bagadiya, Tarachand S/o Late Shri Mohanlal Bagadiya, Pooran Chand, S/o Late Shri Mohanlal Bagadiya, Respondents No. 1 to 3 are Resident of Village Akaltara, Distt. Janjgir Champa (CG) Naresh, S/o Sitaram Bagadiya, Suresh, S/o Sitaram Bagadiya, Umesh, S/o Sitaram Bagadiya, Dinesh, S/o Sitaram Bagadlya, Gayatri, W/o Sitaram Bagadiya, Respondents N0. 4 to 8 are R/o Torwa, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) Present: Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Addl. Advocate General with Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Dy. Advocate General for the State/appellants. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava. counsel for the respondents. Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. JUDGMENT (Delivered on /4'^dune, 2010) The foltowing judgment of the Court was delivered by Dhirendra Mishra, J. This first appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short "the Act") is directed against the order dated 27th October, 2006 passed in .^ M.J.C.No.12/06, whereby learned Additional District Judge, Janjgir-Champa, on a reference under Section 18(2) of the Act at the instance of respondents- land owners, has passed an award that the respondents-land owners shall be entitled for compensation against acquisition of their 1.07 acres of land @ Rs.10,540/- per decimal with solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% p.a. from 26.5.1995 on the unpaid amount ofcompensation. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that lands belonging to the respondents bearing Khasra No.214 & 216, area 0.71 acre and 0.36 acre of Akaltara i.e. total 1.07 acres of land, was used for construction of road in the year 1966- 67. The Land Acquisition Officer (in short "LAO") awarded compensation Rs.6209/- perdecimal for the diverted land and Rs.18.050/- per acre for the undiverted land. 3. On reference under Section 18(2) of the Act, the Reference Court considering the sale deed executed in the year 1993 of the adjacent residential land, which was sold @ Rs.10540/- per dedmal and further considering that the entire acquired land was fit was residential purposes, as per report ofthe revenue officers, assessed compensation @ Rs.10540/- per decimal for the entire 1 .07 acres of land and also awarded solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% from 26.5.1995. 4. Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Addl. Advocate General with Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the State/appellants, vehemently argued that the Reference Court was not justified in fixing compensation @ Rs.10540/- per decimal by treating the entire 1.07 acres of land as diverted land. The amount of compensation has been arbitrarily fixed without there being any material available on record in this regard and therefore, the same deserves to be set aside and award of the LAO be restored. 5. On the other hand, Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondents-owner, supported the impugned order. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order as also the award passed by the LAO. 7. The Reference Court, on the basis of documentary and oral evidence available on record and further considering the report of the Halka Patwari ^' ^7 that the acquired land js situated amidst the residential accommodations, has held that compensation should be fixed by treating the entire 1.07 acre as residential plot, and further considering the sale deed executed in the year 1993, by which land in the same locality was sold @ Rs.10540/- per decimal; has calculated compensation at the above rate. 8. On due consideration of the arguments advanced by the respective parties and perusal of the impugned order as also the evidence available on record; we are of the opinion that the Reference Court has calculated the amount of compensation strictly on the basis of oral and documentary evidence available on record and the same does not call for any interference. So far as solatium @ 30% on the awarded amount is concerned, the same 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 the endsofjustice. •»t 9. Accordingly; the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order is modified to the extent that the respondents shall be entitled for interest @ 9% p.a., jnstead of 12% p.a., on the amount not paid to the respondents from 26.5.1995 till the date of realization. 10. No order as to costs. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge Khan