9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 1118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence Court"). 3. Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 20767 of 2008 and 21730 of 2008 are directed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short the 'SLAO') and the Managing Director Irrigation Board (for short the 'Board') respectively, against the judgment and order dated 23rd January, 2008 passed by the High Court in MFA No. 8544 of 2007, whereby the High Court enhanced the compensation of the acquired land to ₹ 5,00,000/- per acre for the wet land (garden land). 4. Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 31096-31109 of 2009 are directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 22nd February, 2008 in MFA Nos. 6924 of 2007 (LAC) C/W Nos. 6925/2007, 7289/2007, 7290/2007, 7291/2007, 7292/2007, 7294/2007, 8541/2007, 8543/2007, 8545/2007, 8546/2007, 8549/2007, 8551/2007 and 8553/2007 (LAC), whereby the High Court while relying upon its judgment in the earlier cases granted the compensation at a sum of ₹ 5,00,000/- per acre for wet land (garden land) and ₹ 2,53,750/- per acre for dry land. 5. Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.31169 of 2008 is directed against the judgment of the Reference Court dated 16th March, 2007 in LAC No. 219/2006, vide which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification under Section 4(1) of the Act came to be issued on 4th April, 2002. The crops belonging to the owners were damaged. The SLAO passed an award dated 28th August, 2003, fixing the market value of the wet lands at the rate of ₹ 90,640/- per acre and for dry land at the rate of ₹ 37,200/- with statutory benefits. Other awards were made by the SLAO on different dates. 11. Aggrieved by these awards passed by the SLAO, the claimants sought reference to the Civil Court for determination of the compensation. The Reference Court vide its judgment and award dated 16th March, 2007 enhanced the compensation payable to the claimants to ₹ 2,92,500/- per acre for the wet lands (garden land). In other cases ₹ 1,46,250/- for dry land (lightly irrigated) and ₹ 1,20,000/- for dry land (without mulberry crop) were awarded. This compensation was awarded with other statutory benefits. Still, the claimants felt dissatisfied and preferred appeals before the High Court. These appeals were disposed off by the High Court vide its judgment dated 23rd January, 2008, enhancing the compensation payable to the claimants at the rate of ₹ 5,00,000/- per acre for wet/g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings of the Courts below suffer from a palpable error apparent on the face of the record and the impugned judgment is thus liable to be set aside. With reference to another ancillary legal issue, it has been emphasized on behalf of the appellants, that the claimants do not have any license as required under Section 4 of the Mysore Sales (Control) Act, at least none was produced before the Reference Court and thus the compensation awarded on the alleged ground, that they were carrying on the activity of sericulture resulting in manufacture of silk thread ought not to be the foundation for grant of compensation. 14. According to learned counsel for the respondents-claimants, the Court below and the High Court have correctly appreciated the evidence and taken the view that the crops grown by claimant are shown as Mulberry crops and the documentary evidence clearly shows that about 250 to 400 silk cocoon clusters can be obtained in one crop in wet land. 100 silk cocoon clusters weigh about 45 to 50 kgs. in wet lands and 30 to 35 kgs. in other lands depending upon rain. The average price of the silk cocoons per kg. would be ₹ 100/- to ₹ 150/-. Karigowda, PW-1 had submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aimant who got marked RTC as per Ex. P.2 to P.7, award Thakthe as per Ex.P.8, yield notification and price list of Mulberry crop as per Ex.P.9 and P.10 and estimation as per Ex.P.11. On perusal of the documents relied by the claimant, it is noticed that, in the RTC extracts, the nature of crops being grown by the claimant is shown as Mulberry. The production of RTC Extracts as per Ex. P.2 to P.7 supports the say of PW.1 with regard to growing of mulberry crops over the lands in question. Further the production of Ex.P.9 and P.10 goes to show that, during the year 1999-2001, 4-5 Mulberry crops are being grown in one acre of land. It is clear from these documents that, about 250 to 400 cocoons can be obtained in one crop in wet lands. 100 silk cocoons used to weigh about 45 to 50 kgs in wet lands and 30 to 35 kgs. in lands which are depending upon rains. Further, in the year 2001-2002, the average yield in a wet land would be 250 to 300 silk cocoons per crop. 100 silk cocoons used to weigh 50 to 55 kgs. The average price of silk cocoons per kg. would be ₹ 100/ to ₹ 150/-. 14. Looking to the evidence of PW.1 and the contents of Ex.P.2 to P.10, it is clear that, the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 of the impugned Judgment that as could be seen from Exs. P9 and P10, the claimant was growing maximum of 6 mulberry crop in a year. Despite making this observation, the Reference Court has taken only four crops a year, which is the minimum. Therefore, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Reference Court ought to have taken at least 5 crops in a year which is average of minimum and maximum of the number of crops. Further, it is not in dispute that the claimant was getting 325 silk cocoons from each of the crops. Further, though the evidence is to the effect that, 100 cocoons weigh 50 kilograms, the Reference Court took 45 kilograms as the weight of 100 cocoons. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, that the learned Reference Court ought to have taken 50 kgs. as weight of 100 cocoons deserves our acceptance. 7. Further, though Ex.P.10 price list reveals that the price of 1 kilogram of cocoons was from ₹ 100 to 150/-, the Reference Court committed error in taking the minimum price ₹ 100/-. In our view, it ought to have taken the average of minimum and maximum prices i.e. ₹ 125/- per kilogram. If 5 mulber ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffect that, 100 cocoons weigh 50 kilograms, the Reference Court took 45 kilograms as the weight of 100 cocoons. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, that the learned Reference Court ought to have taken 50 kilograms as weight of 100 cocoons deserves our acceptance. 7. Further, though Ex.P.10 price list reveals that the price of 1 kilogram of cocoons was from ₹ 100 to 150/- the Reference Court committed error in taking the minimum price ₹ 100/-. In our view, it ought to have taken the average of minimum prices i.e. ₹ 125/- per kilogram. If 5 mulberry crops per year and 325 cocoons per crop are taken and if weight of 100 cocoon is taken at ₹ 50 kilograms then per acre yield of cocoons in a year in terms of weight comes to 812.5 kilogram which may be rounded to 800 kilograms. Further, if the price per kilogram of cocoons is taken at ₹ 125/- the annual gross income per acre of land under acquisition comes to ₹ 1,00,000/- (one lakh). If 50% of this income is deducted towards the cost of sericulture, the net annual income from sericulture comes to ₹ 50,000/- per acre. By multiplying this amount with the multiplier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w the scheme of the Act, it will not be appropriate either to apply the rule of strict construction or too liberal construction to its provisions. The Act has a unique purpose to achieve, i.e. fulfillment of the various purposes (projects) to serve the public interest at large, for which the land has been acquired under the provisions of this Act by payment of compensation. The power of compulsive acquisition has an inbuilt element of duty and responsibility upon the State to pay the compensation which is just, fair and without delay. Thus, it will be appropriate to apply the rule of plain interpretation to the provisions of this Act. 21. We may notice that Part III provides for procedure and rights of the claimants to receive compensation for acquisition of their land and also states various legal remedies which are available to them under the scheme of the Act. Under Section 18 of the Act, the Reference Court determines the quantum of compensation payable to the claimants. Section 23 provides guidelines, which would be taken into consideration by the court of competent jurisdiction while determining the compensation to be awarded for the acquired land. Section 24 of the Act is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o lead evidence to revert the same, if they so desire. In other words, it cannot be said that there is no onus whatsoever upon the State in such reference proceedings. The Court cannot lose sight of the facts and clear position of documents, that obligation to pay fair compensation is on the State in its absolute terms. Every case has to be examined on its own facts and the Courts are expected to scrutinize the evidence led by the parties in such proceedings. 22. At the cost of some repetition, we may notice that the provisions of Sections 23 and 24 of the Act have been enacted by the Legislature with certain objects in mind. The intention of the Legislature is an important factor in relation to interpretation of statutes. The statute law and the case law go side by side and quite often the relationship between them is supplementary. In other words, interpretation is guided by the spirit of the enactment. Interpretation can be literal or functional. Literal interpretation would not look beyond litera legis, while functional interpretation may make some deviation to the letter of the law. Unless, the law is logically defective and suffers from conceptual and inherent ambiguity, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitations specified in them. The power is vested in the Collector to grant compensation; in courts to enhance the same in favour of the claimants whose lands are acquired, in case they are aggrieved. But, this power has to be exercised while keeping in mind the settled guidelines and parameters stated in Sections 23 and 24 of the Act. It will, thus, not be permissible for the authorities to go beyond the scope and purview of the provisions or the pre-requisites stated in these provisions for determination of the fair market value of the land. The statutory law as well as the judgments pronounced by the courts has consistently taken the view that compensation has to be determined strictly in accordance with the provisions of Sections 23 and 24 of the Act. The matters which are to be governed by the terms of Section 24 of the Act cannot be taken into consideration by extending discretion referable to the matters which should be considered by the courts in terms of Section 23 of the Act. To put it in another way, the court should apply the principle of literal or plain construction to these provisions, as the Legislature in its wisdom has not given to the court absolute discretion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore it falls within the general description and principles in the statute. [Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G.P. Singh, Page 51, 9th Edition 2004]. 28. In the light of these principles now we may advert to the language of Sections 23 and 24 of the Act. The provision open with the words, that in determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under the Act, the court shall take into consideration the stated criteria and in terms of Section 23(1-A), the claimants would be entitled to additional amount @ 12 % per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4, to the date on which the Award is made by the Collector or possession of the land is taken, whichever is earlier. In addition to this, in terms of Section 23(2), the land owners- claimants are entitled to 30% 'on such market value' because of the compulsory nature of acquisition. 'Such market value' is an expression which must be read ejusdem generis to the provisions of Section 23(1) of the Act, as they alone would provide meaning and relevancy to the guidelines which are to be taken into consideration by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and that too from the date of issuance of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act. It is only the statutory benefits which would be available in terms of Sections 23(1-A) and 23(2) of the Act. 33. A Bench of this Court in the case of Nelson Fernandes & Ors. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa & Ors. [(2007) 9 SCC 447], while discussing on this aspect of the Act and its relevancy to the market value of the land, held as under :- "22. In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded, the LAO shall be guided by the provisions of Sections 23 and 24 of the Act. As per Section 22 of the Act, the market value of the land has to be determined at the date of publication of notice under Section 4 of the Act i.e. 25-8-1994. As per Section 24, the LAO shall also exclude any increase in the value of land likely to accrue from use to which it will be put once acquired. The market value of the land means the price of the land which a willing seller is reasonably expected to fetch in the open market from a willing purchaser. In other words, it is a price of the land in hypothetical market. During the site inspection, it has been observed that the land under acquisition i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome bearing or some connection with the agricultural activity being carried on, on the land in question. Such an approach by the Court is neither permissible nor prudent, as it would be opposed to the legislative intent contained under the provisions of Sections 23 and 24 of the Act. 37. Similarly, another example which can usefully be referred at this stage itself is that a person growing sugarcane on the land, which is acquired, would be entitled to the compensation of the land with reference to the agricultural yield and/or capitalization thereof only in respect of sugarcane. The rate of sugarcane in the market may be a relevant consideration but the fluctuating prices of sugar and other allied products in the market will be of no relevance in determining the fair market value of the acquired land. 38. It is the option of the agriculturist to give his sugarcane crop for manufacture of sugar or gur or for any other purpose which he may choose using his business wisdom but the costing and manufacturing activity of that particular product for which the sugarcane had been supplied by him would not be, in our view, a relevant consideration for determining the fair market value of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d used for various purposes at a commercial level. 44. The respondents in the present appeal had filed an affidavit dated 14th July, 2009 to substantiate their arguments that cocoons and silk thread is the end product for which the Mulberry crop is being used and, therefore, the income from or market value of cocoon and even the silk thread would be a relevant consideration for determination of compensation. In paragraph 1(1) of the affidavit it has been averred that cocoon (a female moth) in a single laying lays 450-550 Grains DFL (Deceased Free Layings) on a single day. The same is made to lie on an egg sheet. The entire 450-550 Grains are called as one egg and each of these Grains will develop as one cocoon. Therefore, out of one egg the claimants get 450-550 cocoons which weigh 1.5 gms to 2.00 gms. each. The literature annexed to this affidavit shows that Sericulture, the technique of silk production, is an agro-industry playing an eminent role in the rural industry of India. It also says that the cost of producing mulberry has a direct impact on the cost of producing cocoons, as nearly 60% of the total cost of production of cocoons goes to the production of mulberry leaves. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... providing it as a food to the silk worms. 48. It would have been more desirable for the reason that there was no evidence led by the claimants to substantiate and justify their claim with reference to the alleged silk cocoons being an agricultural activity, the onus being upon them. There was a presumption in the mind of the court as well as the claimants that, the manufacture of silk thread by the stated process of boiling silk cocoons which is the result of the silk worm being fed by mulberry leaves is an agricultural activity. This presumption is contrary to law and the literature referred by the expert body as well. 49. It is quite similar to the crops grown in different parts of the country for example sugarcane and tea. The tea leaves are pruned and used for manufacturing different kinds of tea and allied products. Similar is the case with the sugarcane. The manufacturing and commercial activities for manufacture of tea, sugar and for that matter silk from silk worms cannot be treated as a permissible factor to be taken into consideration by the courts for determining the fair market value of the land. Activity of agriculture cannot thus be equated to sericulture. While ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purposes of Section 23 of the Act. 52. The learned Reference Court which enhanced the compensation to ₹ 2,92,500/- in relation to wet land ; ₹ 1,46,250/- lightly irrigated land and ₹ 1,20,000/- to other land, and the High Court in enhancing compensation to ₹ 5,00,000/- for wet land and ₹ 2,53,750/- for dry land have primarily based their reasoning which is not sustainable in law being contrary to the statutory scheme of the Act. 53. We are unable to appreciate the approach adopted by the learned Reference Court and as upheld by the High Court. The basic error of law to which the courts below have fallen is that ultimate manufacturing of silk thread under the nomenclature of cocoons has been treated as a purely agricultural activity relevant for determination of fair market value of the land in terms of Section 23 of the Act. 54. We are unable to uphold the methodology adopted by the courts as well as the extent of compensation awarded to the claimants. The other reasons for our not accepting the findings recorded and compensation allowed by the High Court is that, there is no evidence on record to show that there is any intrinsic or inseparable lin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith regard to mulberry crops but talks of cocoons which were stated to be 250-300 in one acre wet land (for 1 crop). 57. While adopting the criteria of capitalization and multiplying the same by 10, the finding of the High Court is clearly not supported by any cogent evidence on record and thus the question of applying the multiplier to a figure which has been arrived at, without any evidence would be inconsequential. 58. There is no direct and appropriate evidence to show any nexus to support the claim of the claimants. Thus, cocoons cannot be considered as a crop even as per literature submitted by the respective parties. Therefore the finding recorded is unsustainable even on appreciation of evidence. What method should be adopted for determining fair market of the acquired land 59. To examine what method could be adopted for determining the market value of land and criticism of the method adopted by the Land Acquisition Collector, by the courts, that the same is not in accordance with law, we must notice various methods which are normally adopted by the Courts for determining the fair market value of the land and which of the method can be more properly applied in the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e at the rate of 10% to 15% of the fair market value determined in accordance with law to avoid any unfair loss to the claimants suffering from compulsive acquisition. However, this consideration should squarely fall within the parameters of Section 23 while taking care that the negative mandate contained in Section 24 of the Act is not offended. How one or any of the principles afore stated is to be applied by the courts, would depend on the facts and circumstances of a given case. 62. In the present case, the Court has applied the method of agricultural yield and multiplier of 10 years. Further, it has declined to accept the method adopted by the Collector for granting compensation to the claimants for the reason that the SLAO ought not to have taken recourse to the method of sale statistics. It was further recorded that no sale instances of Sanaba Village three years prior to 2002 were available and instances of adjacent village should not have been taken into consideration. Instead, the market value should have been calculated by adopting capitalization method and no reason was stated as to why this method was not applied. We are unable to accept the approach of the High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... illages are the same then they could be awarded similar compensation or such other compensation as would be just and fair. 65. The cases of acquisition are not unknown to our legal system where lands of a number of villages are acquired for the same public purpose or different schemes but on the commonality of purpose and unite development. The parties are expected to place documentary evidence on record that price of the land of adjoining village has an increasing trend and the court may adopt such a price as the same is not impermissible. Where there is commonality of purpose and common development, compensation based on statistical data of adjacent villages was held to be proper. Usefully, reference can be made to the judgments of this Court to the cases of Kanwar Singh & Ors. v. Union of India [JT 1998 (7) SC 397] and Union of India v. Bal Ram & Anr. [AIR 2004 SC 3981]. 66. In this regard we may also make a reference to the judgment of this Court in the case of Kanwar Singh & Ors. v. Union of India [AIR 1999 SC 317], where sale instance of the adjacent villages were taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the fair market value of the land in question and their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andavapura. For the said reason, the statement of the sale transactions of the garden lands within the Hobli Circle of the said village is taken as base. As such, the details of the transactions are as under : Sl No Name of the Village Sy. No. Nature Extent of land Sale consideration R.No. & date 01 Mahadevapura (Melukote Hobli) 84/1 Garden land 0-10 G Rs.26000 1318/99-00 4-10-99 02 Hosahalli (Chinkurali Hobli) 12/6 Garden land 0-18 G Rs.37500 1770/99-00 6-12-99 03 Dinkakaval (Chinkurali Hobli) Out of 33 Garden land 0-10 G Rs.27000 184/00-01 29-04-00 04 Vaddara halli (Kasaba Hobli) 36/4 Garden Land 0-09 Rs.30000 199/01- 02 20-4-00 36/2 Garden land 0-03 36/3 Garden land 0-02 0-14 05 Vaddara halli (Kasaba Hobli) 51/7 Garden land 0-17½ Rs.37000 1028/01- 02 26-06-01 Total 01-29 ½ 1,57,500 The extent of garden land in which there was transaction : 01 Acre 29 ½ Guntas Total amount of transaction : ₹ 1,57,500/- Per Acre 1,57,500 x 40/69.5 = 90647-48 or 90640-00 Per gunta 2266-18 or 2266-00 Per Acre ₹ 90,640/- and per gunta ₹ 2266/- In the same ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ire chunk of the land was being used for raising mulberry crop and was acquired for common purpose, that is, the lands were submerged in the water coming from the Hemavathi Dam. 70. This Court in the case of Shaji Kuriakose (supra) held that out of the three afore stated methods, the courts adopt comparable sales method of valuation of land while fixing the market value of the acquired land, comparable sales method of valuation of land is preferred than the other methods such as capitalization of net income method or expert opinion method. Comparable sales methods of valuation is preferred because it furnishes the evidence for determination of the market value of the acquired land which a willing purchaser would pay for the acquired land if it has been sold in open market at the time of issue of notification under Section 4 of the Act. In Kantaben Manibhai Amin & Anr. v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Baroda [AIR 1990 SC 103] this Court also stated that latest sale instance closer to the date of notification for acquisition of the land should be taken into consideration. 71. It is also an accepted judicial norm that the claimants can be given the benefit of awarding compen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 of the Act. The average of sale statistical instances referred above comes out to be ₹ 1,57,500/- for sale of 01 Acre 29 ½ Guntas i.e. 90,647.48 per acre. Since the sale instances relied upon are nearly around 1 to 2 ½ years prior to the date of notification, they are relevant considerations and, therefore, the claimants are entitled to an increase at the rate of 15% per annum compounded. 73. The aforesaid increase, in our view, is justified and equitable - firstly, on the ground that there was increasing trend in the sale price of that land and secondly, the lands acquired were being used by the agriculturists for production of mulberry crops which had a restrictive use in the manufacturing, commercial or industrial activities i.e. feeding the silk worms which are ultimately used for production of silk thread. The court cannot use this admitted restricted use to the disadvantage of the land owners and some benefit should be given to them while balancing the equities in accordance with law. The concept of fair compensation payable for the acquired land is embodied in the Act itself, particularly in view of secondly and fifthly of Section 23 of the Act. In fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd but they have also been deprived of seasonal income that was available to them as a result of sale of mulberry leaves. Deprivation of livelihood is a serious consideration. The Court is entitled to apply some kind of reasonable guess work to balance the equities and fix just and fair market value in terms of the parameters specified under Section 23 of the Act. The SLAO has ignored both these aspects firstly providing of annual increase, and secondly, giving some weightage to the special agricultural purpose and the purpose for which the mulberry crop had to be utilized. The claimants have not proved and produced on record sale instances. They have also not produced on record any specific evidence to justify the compensation awarded to them by the Reference Court and/or the High Court. In fact, there is hardly any evidence, much less a cogent and impeccable evidence to support the increase on the basis of net income capitalization method. It is a settled rudiment of law that the Court, in given facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the potentiality and utility of the land acquired, can award higher compensation to ensure that injustice is not done to the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue is to provide appropriate addition for the mulberry cultivation to the value arrived at for the land without mulberry cultivation. The second method is instead of taking the value of cocoons for the purpose of capitalization, take a part thereof, being the value of the mulberry crop input and capitalize the same. The land in question is special garden lands being used only for growing mulberry crop. 75. Keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of the case, it will also be just and fair to adopt some liberal approach with some element of guess work to provide the claimants with just and fair market value of the land in question. It must be remembered that, the entire land including village Sanaba and all other villages was acquired for the purpose of submerging the lands because of the water coming from the Hemavathi Dam. In view of the cumulative discussion referred to above, we are of the considered view that it will be just, fair, equitable and in consonance with Sections 23 and 24 of the Act that the market value of the land as on 04.04.2002 can safely be taken as ₹ 2,30,000/- per acre in the case of garden land and, applying the accepted principle of reducing the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earlier would, dehor the provisions of the Act and, therefore, was improper. Thus, the possession has to be legal and within the framework of law. The provision of the Act clearly lays down the procedure required to be followed while taking possession of the acquired land. The words "from the date on which he took the possession of the land" occurring in Section 20 would mean lawful taking of possession. The case of Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills Ltd. v. State of Gujarat [(1991) 1 SCC 262], also stated the principle that, interest on the compensation amount could be awarded under Section 34 of the Act, with effect from the date of taking possession. However, this controversy need not detain us any further, as the three Judge Bench of this Court in the case of R.L. Jain (D) by Lrs. v. DDA & Ors. [2004 (4) SCC 79] considered all these aspects of the matter and held as under :- "……. 15. Similar view has been taken in a recent decision by a Bench of two Judges in Lila Ghosh v. State of W.B., reported in (2004) 9 SCC 337 and the reasons given there in para 16 of the Report are being reproduced below: 16. ……There are two decisions of this Court, wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e property has been acquired compulsorily he is not making claim for damages properly or technically so-called; he is basing his claim on the general rule that if he is deprived of his land he should be put in possession of compensation immediately; if not, in lieu of possession taken by compulsory acquisition interest should be paid to him on the said amount of compensation". 17.1. The normal rule, therefore, is that if on account of acquisition of land a person is deprived of possession of his property he should be paid compensation immediately and if the same is not paid to him forthwith he would be entitled to interest thereon from the date of dispossession till the date of payment thereof. But here the land has been acquired only after the preliminary notification was issued on 9-9-1992 as earlier acquisition proceedings were declared to be null and void in the suit instituted by the landowner himself and consequently, he was not entitled to compensation or interest thereon for the anterior period. 18. In a case where the landowner is dispossessed prior to the issuance of preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Act the Government merely takes possession of the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not have granted any interest under the provisions of the Act, for a date anterior to the issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act. However, following the dictum of the Bench, we direct the Collector to examine the question of payment of rent/damages to the claimants, from the period when their respective lands were submerged under the back water of the river, till the date of issuance of the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, from which date, they would be entitled to the statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation. 79. As noticed in the opening part of the judgment, the respondents had taken an exception and raised objection to the maintainability of the appeal before this Court being directly filed against the judgment of the Principal Civil Judge, Senior Division (Reference Court). It is true, that right of appeal is a statutory right. It normally should be exercised in terms of the statute but the fact of the matter, in the present appeals, is that the High Court had followed its earlier view and disposed of number of appeals against the judgment of the Reference Court against which appeals have been preferred before this Court. In the meanwhile, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings by compulsive acquisition. Any unnecessary delay in payment of the compensation to them would cause serious prejudice and even may have adverse effect on their living. In these circumstances, we consider it necessary to issue appropriate directions to the State authorities and request the Courts, where cases are pending arising from the same notification, to dispose of the pending proceedings without any further delay. 80. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow these appeals in part, with the following directions: - (i) The appeals filed by the State are partially allowed. In the peculiar facts and circumstance of the present case, the claimants would be entitled to get compensation at the rate of ₹ 2,30,000/- per acre for the wet/garden land and at the rate of ₹ 1,53,400/- per acre for the dry land. (ii) The claimants - land owners would be entitled to get statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation under Sections 23(1A) and 23(2) of the Act and interest in terms of Section 28 of the Act. (iii) Since, the appeals filed by the State have been partially allowed by this Court, we hope that the Government shall grant compensation to all the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
