- (1.) S. K. Phaujdar, J. This first appeal is directed against the award of the Hnd Addl. Distt. Judge, Agra, recorded on a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short the Act') in LA case No. 181 of 1986 which was started before the Hnd Addl. District Judge at Agra. The reference was made on the basis of the claim made by Laxmi Narain (the present respondent 1) in connection with an award dated 15-4-1985. His land in plot No. 101 measuring 3 bighas, 15 biswas and 10 biswancies (10405 sq. yards) in Mauza Ashafabad, District Firozabad, was ac quired for construction of a 220 KV sub station and staff quarters of the U. P. State Electricity Board. Anotification was made under Section 4 (1) of the Act on 19- 9-1980 and it was followed by a notification under Section 6 (1) of the Act on 1-11-1980. The claimant had filed his claim before the Land Acquisition Officer and compensa tion was awarded for the acquired 10405 sq. yards of land at the rate of Rs. 18. 90 per sq. yard. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded an additional amount of 12 per cent per annum on the above sum from the date of notification under Section 4 up to the date of possession. He also allowed solatium at the rate of 30 percent and interest at the rate of 9 percent from the date of taking possession for a period of one year and, thereafter, at the rate of 15 percent per annum. A further amount of Rs. 2703/- was awarded for a well standing on the land. In all, a payment of Rs. 3,75,240. 56 p. was made to the claimant.
(2.) THE claimant had laid a claim at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. ft. i. e. Rs. 90/- per sq. yard before the Land Acquisition Officer and the award of the Land Acquisition Officer dissatisfied him and on his prayer the reference under Section 18 of the Act was made on 11-3-1986. THE claimants asserted before the reference Court that the compensation awarded was inade quate and he should have been paid at the rate of Rs. 90/- per s q. yard as the Sand acquired was situated on the Agra-Kanpur road near the town of Firozabad and had the potentially of a building site. It was stated that facilities of water, electricity, tube- well, railways and roadways were available near and surrounding the property and the Land Acquisition Officer had failed to consider the cost of develop ment and of the trees at the time of giving the award. The claim was opposed by the present appellant contending that the compensation awarded was adequate and proper and was not liable to be enhanced. It was stated that the land was situated away from the road and was only an agricultural land. There were no facilities of water, electricity etc. as alleged by the claimant. Interest and other payment were also duly awarded. The land had no poten tiality as a building site and the claim was liable to be dismissed. The reference Court framed three issues as follows: 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was inade quate and, if so, what would be the reasonable, compensation for the land acquired. 2. Whether the claimant was entitled to solatium and interest at the enhanced rate; and 3. To what relief, if any, was the claimant entitled ? On issue No. 1 the reference Court considered the sale-deeds produced as ex emplars and was of the view that the claimant was entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs. 651- per sq. yard. On the second issue, the reference Court found that the claimant had been awarded solatium, additional amount and interest at the rates he had claimed. He only ob served that these rates would be applicable on the enhancement made by the refer ence Court. Accordingly, he decided issue No. 3 also to conclude that the claimant was entitled to a compensation of Rs. 6,76,325/- and on that amount he was fur ther entitled to an additional sum at the rate of Rs. 121- percent per annum from 19-9-1980 to 25-6-1981 and to interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum on the aforesaid amount w. e. f. 25-6-1981 for one year and thereafter at the rate of 15 percent till the date of actual payment and the amount awarded/received by him shall be deducted from the sum awarded by the reference Court.
(3.) IN this appeal, learned Counsel for the parties did not question the rate of additional payment, interest or solatium as granted by the Land Acquisition Officer and as confirmed by the reference Court. The amount of compensation, however, rather the rate of compensation per sq. yard of land was seriously disputed by the appellant. The learned Counsel for the appellant also supplemented his oral sub missions by a written note of arguments quoting copiously the case laws relied on by him. Learned Counsel for the respon dent also analysed the evidence to say that the reference Court had rightly enhanced the amount and he also relied on certain case laws. The enhancement was made with reference to certain sales which were proved by producing certain copies of sale-deeds. These sale-deeds were challenged on several grounds. It was stated that without production of the original sale deeds the certified copies could not have been acted upon. It was further stated that the sale-deeds could not have been read as exemplars as they were not of the vicinity of the suit-property or of the time of ac quisition. It was further argued that without examination of vendor and vendee of the sale-deeds those could not have been relied upon. The sale-deed were also challenged on the ground that the same were for small areas and the same rate could not have been given to a large chunk of land. It was stated further that the land was simply an agricultural one without any facility of electricity as admitted by the claimant and the compensation could not have been awarded at the rate prevalent for abadi lands. The learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the land in question was very near the Firozabad township and had the potentiality of a building site and could have fetched in the open market a better price than even the rate awarded by the reference Court.;