SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. RACHANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is against the award of enhanced compensation in respect of 18 acres 38 guntas of land in Survey No. 190/1 and 190/2 of Srinivas-Saradage village, in Gulbarga taluk, acquired for a major irrigation project, under preliminary notification, published on 6-9-1990. Although cross-objections are filed by the claimant, since no Court fee is paid thereon, it cannot be considered and hence disposed of accordingly.

(2.) By his award dated 27-10-1992, the Land Acquisition Officer evaluated the land at Rs. 12,000/- per acre. In addition he has awarded further amount of Rs. 146/- for two coconut trees which were found by him on the land. On reference under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act) the Reference Court has awarded enhanced compensation for the land at Rs. 30,000/- in addition to separate award of Rs. 43,800/- for coconut trees, Rs. 53,000/- for 'bund' and Rs. 3,000/- for lime trees. For the purpose of valuation of the land the learned Civil Judge has placed reliance upon Ex. P-13 sale deed dated 13-7-1990, pertaining to a transaction in respect of a dry land in Khaji Kotanur village, which, according to him, was comparable to the acquired land. The acquired land being an irrigated land, he has increased the value by 11/2 times over and above and the consideration under Ex. P-13. In addition, he has awarded all the statutory benefits to the claimants.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader has challenged the awardon more than one ground. It is urged that the evaluation of the market value on the basis of the alleged value of land in another village is not sustainable. It is further urged that it is not permissible to evaluate the land and the trees separately for computation of compensation, as has been done in the instant case. The compensation awarded is therefore arbitrary and excessive. On the other hand, Sri S.P. Shankar, appearing for the claimant sought to justify the method adopted by the Reference Court in determining the compensation for the property acquired, which according to him, is actually on the lower side.