LUCY VANLALHRUAII Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, AIZAWL AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
District Collector, Aizawl And Others
Click here to view full judgement.
Prasanta Kumar Deka, J. -
(1.) Heard Mr.C.Lalramzauva, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr Jonathan L.Sailo, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also heard Mr Rosangzuala Ralte, learned Govt. Advocate and Mrs Linda L.Fambawl, learned Govt. Advocate.
(2.) The present appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4.4.2017 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl passed in L.A.Case No. 21/2014 has preferred this appeal u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
(3.) The appellant in his petition for enhancement pleaded that the Government of Mizoram took steps for acquiring land measuring 2305467.26 sq.ft. for construction of road from Sihmui to Ramrikawn under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894(in short the Act). The land was acquired for public purpose and the Revenue department, Govt. of Mizoram issued notification dated 20.3.2013 u/s 4(1) of the Act, and the appellant submitted objections. In award No. 1/2013 the land of the appellant was grouped under Group-B located at nearby the road from Sihhmui to university Road. The land of the appellant was acquired after assessing the value @ Rs. 60 per Sq.ft. area of land. While determining the value of the land of the appellant covered by LSC No. AZL-1311 of 1984, the District Collector did not consider the matter as per the guidelines prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, like prevailing market rate and the market value of other similarly situated land in and around the Aizawl city including that of the one acquired for BSF. Further it was stated that owing to severance of the acquired portion of the land, the left over land had become unusable considering the reduction in the size of the plot of land. The potentiality for development and location of her land were also not taken into consideration by the District Collector. Hence the appellant made a prayer before the learned Reference Court to fix the market value of her land not lesser than Rs.1,500/- per sq.ft. Alongwith the said rate she also sought for the solatium of 30% on the market value of her land u/s 23(2) of the Act, interest @ 12% per annum on the market value of her land u/s 23 (1A) of the Act and the consequent direction to the Collector to pay interest on the excess compensation.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.