R. N. Sharma, J. - (1.) This is a First Civil Appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the District Judges Bitapur in a reference made to him under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. A piece of land-measuring 8.10 acres situate in Mauza Naurangabad, Pargana and District Kheri consisting of three plots and having a building and boundary wall standing thereon was acquired by the Collector from the appellant. It has been conceded before us that this land is situate within the area of Kheri town known as the Civil Lines. The Collector awarded a compensation of Rs. 4036/- for the building and boundary wall and Rs. 283/12/- for the land treating the appellant as an occupancy tenant of this land. The appellant was not satisfied with the compensation awarded and asked for a reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. His contention was that he was not an occupancy tenant but a perpetual tenant, and that he should be allowed compensation according to the potential value of the land and compensation for severance of the portion of the land acquired from the whole land belonging to him. He also claimed interest on the amount of compensation. The learned District Judge held that the land in question should be treated as in perpetual tenancy of the appellant. He did not find the appellant entitled to any compensation for the potential value of the land or for its severance from the rest of the appellant's and, but enhanced the compensation for the land to Rs. 3,900/ - according to what he considered to be the market value. Compensation for the building and wall remained the same i.e., Rs. 4036/-. The learned District Judge also held that the appellant was entitled to interest on the amount increased by him from the date of award at 6 per cent per annum. The appellant was not satisfied with the decree of the learned District Judge and has come up in appeal.
(2.) It is not disputed before us now that the appellant was a perpetual tenant or lessee of this land. The grounds pressed before us on behalf of the appellant are that the compensation awarded for the land is much too inadequate and was wrongly assessed by the Court below, that he is entitled to compensation for the potential value of the land and for its severance from the remaining land, and that, in any case, he is entitled to an additional amount equivalent to 15 per centum on the market value of the land as provided in Sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. According to the calculations of the appellant the compensation for the land should be Rs. 78117/-. But he has prayed for a decree only for Rs. 40,000/-, because he did not like to pay larger amount of court-fee.
(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the State. The learned Standing Counsel has very fairly conceded that the appellant is entitled to an additional amount equivalent to 15 per centum on the market value in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition. The lower Court erred in not allowing such amount and we hold that the appellant is entitled to the additional amount of 15 per centum on the amount that may be awarded to him as compensation for the acquisition of his land.;