RAM CHANDRA SARMA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
RAM CHANDRA SARMA
STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Click here to view full judgement.
M.M.Dutt, J. -
(1.)This appeal is at the instance of the referring claimant Sm. Saraswati Devi, since deceased, and it is directed against the award of the Calcutta Improvement Tribunal affirming the award of the Land Acquisition Collector and rejecting the reference case.
(2.)The premises No. 20, Ultadanga Main Road belonged to the said Sm. Saraswati Devi. On January 13, 1955, a notification under Section 43 (2) of the Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), was published by the Board of Trustees for the improvement of Calcutta for the Street Scheme known as Scheme No. VIII-M (widening of Ultadanga Main Road between the Scheme No. V-M and Scheme No. VII-M). The owner Sm. Saraswati Devi filed objection to the proposed acquisition of the said premises. On October 20, 1955, the Act was amended by the Calcutta Improvement (Amendment) Act, 1955 and a new paragraph 1-A which modified the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was inserted after paragraph 1 of the schedule to the Act. The new paragraph 1-A is as follows: --
"After Section 6, the following section shall be deemed to be inserted namely:- 6-A. When acquisition is proposed to be made of land comprised within any improvement scheme framed by the Board and published under Section 49 of the Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911- (i) The publication of a notice of the improvement scheme under sub-section (2) of Section 43 of the Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911, shall be substituted for end have the same effect as publication of a notification in the Official Gazette and giving public notice of the substance of such notification in the locality under Section 4. (ii) Proceedings under Section 45 and Sub-section (1) of Section 47 of the Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911, shall be substituted for and have the same effect as proceedings under Section 5-A. (iii) The publication of a notification under Section 49 of the Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911, shall be substituted for and have the same effect as a declaration under Section 6."
(3.)The Collector valued the land of the disputed premises having an area of 9 bighas 14 cottahs 14 chhataks at Rs. 4,56,981.87 at the rate of Rs. 2,345/-per cottah on average, the structures at Rs. 2,58,000/- and the trees at Rs. 80/-. He awarded a total compensation of Rs. 7,15,061.87. The said Sm. Saraswati Devi had the matter referred to the Calcutta Improvement Tribunal on a petition of reference. Before the Tribunal, she claimed the value of the land at the rate of Rs. 3,200/- per cottah on the average and that of the structures at Rs. 3,00,000/-. She also claimed statutory allowance of 15% as allowed under Section 23 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act. The claim for the higher valuation of the structures was not pressed before the Tribunal at the hearing.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.