STATE OF U P Vs. WIDOW OF LATE L JANKI DAS
LAWS(ALL)-1965-8-10
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 24,1965

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Appellant
VERSUS
WIDOW OF LATE L.JANKI DAS Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

NARASINGH DAS V. SECY. OF STATE [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY IMPROVEMENT TRUST V. MERVANJI MANEKJI MISTRY [REFERRED TO]
ATMARAM BHAGWANT GHADGE V. COLLECTOR OF NAGPUR [REFERRED TO]
NARAYANA GAJAPATIRAJU V. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,VIZAGAPATAM [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT VS. BAPURAO DNYANOBA CHIDDARWAR [LAWS(BOM)-1972-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
KAMLA DEVI VS. B S F JODHPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-1987-4-6] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI VS. SMT.KAILASHWATI & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-12-33] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Khare, J. - (1.)1. These are seven connected first appeals arising out of compensation proceedings under the U. P. Land Acquisition (Rehabilitation of Refugees) Act, No. 26 of 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). An area of land, measuring 19.99 acres belonging to several proprietors and situate in Lekhraj Muzbita within the Municipal Limits of the city of Meerut, was acquired under a notification dated 29th January, 1950, for the rehabilitation of certain refugees, who formed a society under the style of Jain Pursharthi, Housing Cooperative Society, Meerut. Possession was delivered to the Society on 27th June, 1950, The land acquired belonged to various proprietors, who claimed compensation at the rates varying from Rs. 5/- to Rs. 12/- per square yard. On a portion of the land mere were tenants, who claimed compensation for their tenancy rights as well as for trees, wells and buildings standing on their land. The Land Acquisition Officer calculated the value of the land treating it as agricultural land. He also allowed some compensation for trees, wells and the constructions. On a request being made by some of the proprietors and tenants references were made to the Court of the learned District Judge who, after considering the entire evidence led before him, arrived at the conclusion that the land which was beine acquired should be treated as a potential building site. He, however, was of the view that the northern portion of the land which was acquired was of greater value than the southern portion which was separated from the northern portion by means of a Kachcha road. He, therefore, allowed compensation to the owners and the tenants treating the land as a potential building site. The compensation allowed for the land to the north of the kachcha road was at the rate of Rs. 1/8/- per square yard, while the compensation allowed for the land lying to the south of the kachcha road was at the rate of Re. 1/- per square yard. The learned District Judge further fixed the proportion in which the landlords and the tenants were to receive compensation. He found that the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer Jn respect of the buildings, trees and wells was adequate.
(2.)WITH the consent of the parties all the references made to the learned District Judge were disposed of by one common judgment dated 10th November, 1953. Six appeals have been filed by the State of U. P. against the valuation fixed by the learned District Judge on the ground that it was too high and compensation should have been allowed treating the land as agricultural land. Appeals Nos. 63, 64, 78 and 81 are directed against four sets of proprietors namely, Sm. Asharfi Devi, Dr. Maqsud Husain, Sm. Gomti Devi and Joti Prasad respectively, while the remaining two appeals filed by the State Government are directed against two sets of tenants, namely, Khairati and others (Appeal No. 79 of 1954) and Ramji Lal (Appeal No. 80 of 1954). Appeal No. 67 of 1954 has been filed by Dr. Maqsud Husain on the ground that the rate at which the compensation has been awarded by the learned District Judge is too low and that it should have been awarded at the rate of Rs. 5/-per square yard. Another ground was that no compensation had been awarded to the appellant in respect of six bfswas land of plot No. 1551.
The judgment of the learned District Judge clearly shows that due to inadvertence no compensation has been allowed in respect of the land of plot No. 1551. The area of the plot is six biswas and there can be no reason why compensation should not have been allowed for the land of plot No. 1551 also. The learned Standing Counsel has conceded before us that the claim of the appellant (Dr. Maqsud Husain) in respect of the compensation for the area of plot No. 1551 is well-founded and that he should get compensation for that land also at the rate which is held to be reasonable for the southern portion of the land, which has been acquired.

The valuation fixed by the learned District Judge in respect of the trees, wells and the huts has not been questioned, before us. The points for determination in the appeals, therefore are- (1) Whether compensation should have been allowed treating the land as agricultural land or as a potential building site, (2) What was the proper rate at which compensation should have been allowed.

(3.)FOUR witnesses, namely, Maqsud Husain, Joti Prasad, Abrar Husain and Tribeni Prasad were examined for the proprietors of the land, while two witnesses, namely, Sain Das and Bishun Das were examined on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh. Maqsud Husain and Joti Prasad were two out of the several proprietors whose land has been acquired. Sain Das was the President of the Jain Pur-sharthi Housing Co-operative Society, Meerut, while Bishun Das was a member of the Society. Several exemplars and other documents were filed on behalf of both the parties. The learned District Judge also made a local inspection.
The following facts are abundantly clear from the inspection note recorded by the learned District Judge and the oral evidence led by both the parties and have not been disputed before us:-- The land acquired is situate about three furlongs from Meerut city railway station. It is bounded by the military grass farm on the west, Idgah road on the north, partly by Anand-puri Colony and partly by some fields on the east and by a mango grove on the south. At the time of the inspection the land was found to be open and fairly levelled. The level of the land on the whole was higher than that of the fields to the east and slightly higher than that of Anandpuri. The buildings of the Jain Boarding House, the ice factory and the Arabic College lie to the north of the land which has been acquired and are separated from the latter only by the Idgah road. Prempuri Colony is opposite Jain Boarding House on the other side of the Station Road while the Krishna Flour Mills are opposite the ice factory. It has also come in evidence and was not disputed that the scheme for the Prempuri Colony which is at a distance of 150 or 200 yards from the land which has been acquired was started In the year 1932, while the scheme for the Anandpuri Colony which lies immediately to the east of the northern portion of the land which has been acquired was started in the year 1936. There were about 100 plots in the Prempuri Colony out of which about 75 have already been sold and built upon while the remaining 25 still lie unconstructed.

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.