- (1.) B. K. Sharma, J. This is first appeal preferred by Krishi Utpadan Samiti, Chandpur, district Bijnor against the judg ment and order dated 23-5-1989 passed by Sri Raj Pal Singh, the then II Additional District Judge, Bijnor in L. A. R. No. 149 of l987, Mangu Singh Claimant v. State of U. P. through Collector, Bijnor, Chairman Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Chandpur whereby he partly allowed the reference under Sec tion 18 of the Land Acquisition Act with proprotionate costs and directed that the claimant shall get compensation of his ac quired land of Khasra Plot No. 690m area 19360 sq. yard (four acres) situated in Town Noorupur, district Bijnor at the rate of Rs. 45/- per sq. yard together with solatium at the rate of 30% thereon and additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum for the period from the date of publication of the notification under Sec tion 4 (1) of the Act i. e. 16-7-1985 to the date of delivery of possession i. e. 15-1- 1985 and shall also get interest on the aforesaid enhanced amount of compensa tion at the rate of 9% per annum from 15-1-1986 to 16-1-1987 and at the rate of 15% per annum from 17-1-1987 till actual payment is made.
(2.) THE claimant's land of Khasra Plot No. 690m area 4 acres (19360 sq. yards), situated in Tbwn Noorpur, Fargana Boodhpur, district Bijnor, was acquired for the purposes of construction of UP Mandi Asthal, Noorpur of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Chandpur, district Bijnor. THE preliminary notification under Sec tion 4 (1) of the Act was published on 16-7-1985. THE notification under Section 6 (1) of the Act was published on 19-7- 1985. THE possession was taken over the ac quired land on 15-1-1986. THE Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bijnor made his award on 17-7-1987. He granted compen sation at the rate of Rs. 26,785. 71p. per acre for Gohra Awvval land and Rs. 24. 531. 24p per acre for Sawwai Awwal Aabi land together with solatium at the rate of 30% on the same and 12% addition al amount and interest. He also granted compensation of Rs. 2280/- for six Shisham trees and Rs. 10. 009/- for tube-well. The claimant alleged that the com pensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bijnor is too inade quate and much below the market price, that the acquired land is situated on the provincial High Way and within the limits of Nagar Palika, Noorpur and as such it has acquired the potential value of Abadi land; that the market value of the land acquired was in no case less than Rs. 100/- per sq. yard on the date of notification under Sec tion 4 of the Act; that there is an Ahata and Kothari in the acquired land and the market value of the construction was worth Rs. 50,000/- that there were grown up trees in the land acquired and the market value of these trees was Rs. 10,000/- and as such, the claimant claimed Rs. 7720/- as balance amount of compen sation of the trees. The claimant claimed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 100/-per sq. yard in view of the nature and quality of the land acquired and as such claimed the balance amount of compensa tion of Rs. 18,35,983. 54p. besides Rs. 50,000/- as market value of the construc tion of the Ahata and Kothari and Rs. 7720/- as balance market value of the trees and a reference was sought by the claimant. The opposite party filed a written statement and contested the reference petition on the ground, inter alia, that the land acquired is Sahrai land (agricultural land) and the same is not abadi (Saknai) land; that the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bijnor has awarded adequate amount of compensation on the basis of the instance of sale of the similar land and the land of the instance of sale is situated across the road from the acquired land; that there had been no construction over the acquired land; that the market value of the acquired land was not at the rate of Rs. 100/- per sq. yard; that the claimant has accepted the amount of compensation and as such, the reference petition is barred by Section 18 read with Section 31 (2) of the Act and that the reference petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.
(3.) ON the basis of the aforesaid plead ings of the parties, the following issues were framed: Issues 1. Whether the Special Land Acquisition Officer has not granted fair and adequate amount of compensation, if so, what would be the fair and adequate amount of compensation ? 2. Whether the claimant is entitled to get any amount of compensation for the Ahata and Kothari as alleged in para 7 of the reference petition? 3. Whether the claimant is entitled to any amount of compensation for the trees as alleged in Para No. 8 of the reference petition ? 4. Whether the reference petition is barred by Section 18 read with Section 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act ? 5. Tb what relief, if any, is the claimant entitled ? After taking the evidence and hear ing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court below held on issue No. 1 that the market value of the acquired land at the time of publication of the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was not less than Rs. 45/- per sq. yard and the Special Land Acquisition Officer has not granted the fair and adequate amount of compensation and the fair andadequate amount of compensation of the acquired land is determined at the rate of Rs. 45/- per sq. yard. On issue No. 2, the Court below held that the claimant was not entitled to get any amount of compensa tion for the alleged Ahata and Kothari. On issue No. 3 the Court below found that the Special Land Acquisition Officer has granted adequate and fair amount of com pensation of trees amounting to Rs. 2280/-and the claimant is not entitled to get any further amount of compensation for the trees in question. On issue No. 4, the Court below held that the reference was not barred by Section 18 read with Section 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act. In view of the above findings, the Court below partly allowed the reference petition and passed the judgment and order as aforesaid.;