HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL FIRST APPEAL NO. 72 OF 2007 Tehri Hydro Development Corporation Ltd., Through its Chairman / General Manager, H.O. Bhagirathpuram, Tehri Garhwal, District Tehri Garhwal. .........Appellant/Respondent. Versus Jugmandar Dass Jain, S/o Sri Mukhtiyar Singh Jain, R/o Tehri Town, Tehri Garhwal, Dsitrict – Tehri Garhwal. ......Opp. Party/Petitioner. 3.4.2008 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri U.K. Uniyal, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Sri Shobhit Sharia, counsel for the appellant and Sri A.M. Saklani, counsel for the respondent. 2. By the present First Appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, appellant has prayed for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 11.7.2007 passed by the District Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Land Acquistion Reference No. 15 of 1988 Jugmandar Dass Jain Vs. State of U.P. & T.H.D.C. 3. According to the case of the claimant / opposite party, the land and house on plot of Old Tehri Town of Khata No. 25 Ward No. 2 belongs to him and one Smt. Prema Lata Jain. The share of the claimant in that property was two third and remaining one third belongs to Prem Lata Jain. The same was acquired by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and compensation was awarded. Being unsatisfied with the same, the claimant filed a reference case before the District Judge, Tehri Garhwal. The District Judge allowed the reference and recorded a finding to the following effect: “On the basis of the evidence produced before me, I am of the view that the market value of the land of the petitioner should be fixed at the rated of Rs. 30/- per Sq. Ft. As the total land of the petitioner along with his co-sharer measures 12960 Sq.Ft., hence the amount of compensation should be fixed at Rs. 3,88,800/-as the petitioner has confined his claim in respect of the land only. Towards the land, the claimant has received Rs. 77,760/-, hence the enhanced amount of Rs. 3,11,040/- should be awarded to the claimant along with 12% interest on the enhanced compensation from 11.4.1981 to 11.9.1986 under section 23 (1) (a) of the Land Acquisition Act, Again, claimant is entitled to 30% solatium on the enhanced value of his land. Interest for one year from 12.9.1986 to 11.8.1987 at the rate of 9%per annum under section of the Act is also payable. From 12.9.187 till the delivery of this judgment and future interest till the payment should be granted to the petitioner at the rate of 12%per annum. The issue is decided accordingly.” 4. By recording the aforesaid finding, the reference court has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,11,040/- for the land of the claimant. Further interest @ 12% per annum has been awarded from 11.4.1981 to 11.9.1986 on the enhanced amount under Section 23 (1) (a) of the Land Acquisition Act. Further, the claimant has been awarded 30% solatium on enhanced value of land under Section 23 (2) of the Act. For the period from 12.9.1986 to 11.9.1987, interest @ 9% per annum has also been paid. From 12.9.1987 till the payment, interest @ 12% per annum has also been awarded to the petitioner on the enhanced compensation. In that amount awarded by the reference court 2/3rd had to be paid to Jugmandar Dass Jain and 1/3rd share to Prem Lata Jain. 5. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that present case is squarely covered by the judgment dated 18.2.2008 (F.A. No. 99 of 2005 State and another Vs. Dinesh Chandra Jain), whereby this Court has dismissed the appeal by relying upon the judgment of State vs. Lekhi Ram Semalti (F.A. No. 560 of 2001. Relevant portion of the judgment is quoted below: “11. The Division Bench of this Court has passed judgment in F.A. No. 560 of 2001 (State Vs Lekhi Ram Semalti) which is on same footing. Paras No. 7, 10 and 11 of the judgment are relevant and same are quoted as under: “7. With regard to the rate of the land, the District Judge found that the amount of Rs. 6/- per sq. ft. was inadequate as the house and the adjoining land was located in the populated area of Tehri town i.e. in ward no.2. He has observed that ignoring everything, if one is said to assess value of the land in such an area, then in common experience the value of the land of the claimant could never have been so less as Rs. 6/- per sq. ft. He relied upon the copies of the sale deed dated 16.01.1985, 15.01.1985 and 16.1.1989 executed by one Sri Vijaipal Singh, which filed by the claimant. He observed that subsequently, the inhabitants of ward no. 7 to 10 whose land was 50 meters away from the acquired land, were awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 30/- per sq.ft. According to the District Judge, as it is known to everyone that the Tehri town will submerge in water, therefore, there could not have been any increase in the rate of land since 1983, when the land of the claimant was acquired. Thus, the learned District Judge held that in view of the reported decision Mehta Ravendra Rai Ajit Rai and others vs. State of Gujarat (AIR 1989 SC 2051), the agreement of sale 5 months after notification under section 4 could not be ignored, and the said case law is applicable into the facts of this case. In view of this, he assessed the rate of the land @ Rs. 30/- per sq. ft. 10. The finding of the District Judge that the claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs. 2000/- on account of construction of pucca drain for flow of dirty water measuring 1.5ft. X 1.5ft upto 50ft. does not call for any interference and just and proper. He has also rightly awarded a sum of Rs. 5000/- for two septic tanks constructed by the claimant. The District Judge has also rightly awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the claimant for expenses in shifting of his family and other belonging to a new place. The finding of the District Judge that the claimant is entitled to Rs. 4000/- as cost of trees and Rs. 5000/- towards electric and water connection fittings also does not call for any interference. 11. In view of the above, the claimant is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 2,51,800/- as compensation. In addition of this amount, he will also be entitled to the following claims” a. 30% solatium with effect from 21.01.1983 till the date of award i.e. 31.01.1985. b. Special Compensation @ 12% on the amount of Rs. 2,51,800/- for the aforesaid period. c. Rs. 10, 000/- shifting expenses.” After calculating the aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs. 1,79,367/- which has already been received by the Claimant respondent will also be deducted.” 12. In the aforesaid circumstances, it appears that all the similarly situated land has been finally assessed at Rs. 30/- per sq. ft. either by the District Judge, Tehri or by this Court. There is nothigin on record, which makes the case that the land of the claimant should be assessed at a market value less than said rate i.e. Rs. 30/- per sq. ft. 13. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has assessed the value of house as Rs. 14,171/- whereas the learned District Judge has rightly assessed he value of house as Rs. 24,171/- by adding the value of soak pit, chowk and other small items. I do not find any illegality or ambiguity in the impugned judgment and order dated 31.10.2001 passed by learned District Judge, New Tehri. 14. In view of the above, appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.” 6. Present case is squarely covered by the said judgment and I do not find any infirmity with the judgment and decree passed by the reference court in applying the rate of land as Rs. 30/- per square ft along with the consequential benefits. 7. Consequently, First Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 3.4.2008 Rathour