1 F.A. No. 502/2000 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON. SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SHRIVASTAVA FIRST APPEAL NO. 502/2000 ......... Appellants : 1. Ramaavtar S/o Hardua 2. (a) Ramsajiwan, S/o Late Mandare Bari, aged about 55 years, (b) Ashok Kumar, S/o Late Mandare Bari, aged about 45 years, (c) Santosh Kumar, S/o Late Mandare Bari, aged about 25 years, All are residents of Village Karondiya Dakshin Tola, Tahsil Gopa Banas, District Sidhi, (M.P.) Versus ........ Respondent : State of Madhya Pradesh, Through- Collector, Land Acquisition Officer, Gopaldas Bandh, Sidhi ................................................................................................ Appellants - Shri H.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for appellants. Respondent - Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer ............................................................................................... 2 F.A. No. 502/2000 J U D G M E N T (06/05/2011) 1. This first appeal has been filed by the claimants under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Act”) feeling aggrieved by the award dated 11.4.2000 passed by the Reference Court. 2. The facts for disposal of this appeal lie in narrow compass. After issuing requisite notifications under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(1) and 6 of the Act, the land of the appellants was acquired and possession was taken soon after the publication of notice under Section 4 and 17 of the Act. The land has been acquired for the project “Gopaldas Dam”. 3. The land of appellants are of villages Karoundiya Dakshin Tola, Padra and Muthigawa Chouhan Tola and approximately 9 acres was acquired. 4. Under the same notification, certain other lands of Village Padra were acquired and a case was decided by the Reference Court by passing an award dated 23.12.1995 ( Narbada Ram and others Vs. State of M.P.) by assessing the market value @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. 3 F.A. No. 502/2000 5. The contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that since under the same notification their lands of Village Padra and other villages Karoundiya Dakshin Tola and Muthigawa Chouhan Tola have been acquired, therefore, the market value of the land which has been acquired in the present case should also have been assessed @ Rs.20,000/- per acre which was earlier fixed by the Reference Court while passing the award on 23.12.1995 in aforesaid case. 6. On the other hand, Shri Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer for the State argued in support of the impugned award and submits that this appeal be dismissed because the Reference Court on higher side fixed the market value of the land which has been acquired @ Rs.4000/- per acre for village Padra and Muthigawa Chouhan Tola. Further, it has been put forth by him that since the land of village Karoundiya Dakshin Tola comes within the Municipal limits, 50 paise per sq. ft. has been correctly valued by the Reference Court. 7. Considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties. 4 F.A. No. 502/2000 8. Under the same notification for Village Padra, the Reference Court passed the award @ Rs.20,000/- per acre in earlier case which was decided on 23.12.1995, but, in the present case for Village Padra and Muthigawa Chouhan Tola, altogether different market value of Rs.4,000/- per acre has been assessed. The reason which has been assigned by the learned Reference Court is that his earlier order of reference was under challenge before this Court. 9. However, on bare perusal of the judgment passed by this Court in F.A. No. 243/1996 State of M.P. Vs. Narbada Ram and others (by typographical error, Marmada has been typed in place of Narbada), this Court finds that the appeal of State of M.P. has been dismissed on 20.12.1999 by affirming the award assessing the market value Rs.20,000/- per acre. Thus, I am of the view that for Village Padra and Muthigawa Chouhan Tola of the appellants, the market value for this case should also be assessed @ Rs.20,000/- per acre and accordingly it is so assessed. 10. So far as the land in Village Karoundiya Dakshin Tola is concerned, it is an admitted fact that it is within the Municipal limits. The Reference Court has fixed the 5 F.A. No. 502/2000 compensation @ 50 paise per sq. ft. According to me, at this rate one sq. ft. paper cannot be purchased even in the year 1979 when the land was acquired. On going through the sale deed Ex. P/3 dated 15th October, 1977 of the same Village Karoundiya Dakshin Tola, on calculation it appears that land was sold @ 95/- paise per sq. ft. This sale deed is near about two years prior to the acquisition of the land of the present case. Since the present land of Karoundiya Dakshin Tola is not in the same ward in which the land mentioned in the said sale deed Ex. P/3 was situated, but, certainly it is in the Municipal limits, hence, according to me, @ 80/- paise per sq. ft. the market value of the land Karoundiya Dakshin Tola should be assessed and the same is accordingly assessed. 11. Let the difference of compensation be paid to the appellants and on the enhanced amount of compensation 30% of solatium be calculated and it be paid. The appellants shall also be entitled to the interest on enhanced amount which shall carry 12% p.a. from the date of acquisition. 12. For the reasons stated herein above, this appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein above and the 6 F.A. No. 502/2000 connected appeal filed by the State of M.P (F.A. No. 682/2000) is hereby dismissed. The cost of this appeal shall be borne by respondent State of M.P. Counsel fee Rs.2000/- if pre-certified. {A.K. Shrivastava} Judge rao 7 F.A. No. 502/2000 First Appeal No. 502/2000 06.05.2011 Shri H.K. Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri Yadvendra Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. They are heard. Judgment dictated. Signed and dated separately. (A.K. SHRIVASTAVA) JUDGE rao 8 F.A. No. 502/2000