- (1.) THIS judgment will dispose of two cross-appeals Regular First Appeal No. 291 of 1961 (Raghbir Singh v. Union of India) and Regular First Appeal No. 297 of 1961 (Union of India v. Raghbir Singh) which have been directed against the same award made by the District Judge, Ambala, on May 2, 1961.
(2.) THE matter concerns the quantum of compensation payable to Raghbir Singh claimant for the acquisition of his brick-kilns. The President of India issued notification No. 4/e, dated March 1, 1957, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (hereinafter called the Act), for the acquisition of certain land mentioned in that notification. Thereafter, another Notification No. 6/e, dated March 2, 1957, under Section 6 of the Act was issued. Emergency provisions of Section 17 were invoked and the filing of objections under Section 5-A was dispensed with. The claimant Raghbir Singh filed his claim under Section 9 of the Act claiming the sum of Rs. 2,10,100/ -. The Collector asked for a report from the Revenue Assistant who recommended the payment of Rs. 26,254/-by way of compensation and 15 per cent, solatium thereon. The Collector, however, rejected the claim of the claimant in its entirety by his order August 3, 1959. The claimant filed an application under Section 18 of the Act requiring the Collector to refer the matter of compensation payable to him to the District Court for determination. In that application, the amount of compensation claimed was Rs. 1,07,475/- under the following heads and interest thereon:-- (a) For brick-bats that remained on site which the applicant was not allowed to remove. Rs. 913/- (b) For two rooms which the applicant had to leave on account of their becoming useless for the applicant. Rs. 2,000/- (c) For one well situate in the leased area constructed and owned by the applicant. Rs. 3,500/- (d) For 500 ft. long channel constructed for carrying water from the well to the place where the bricks were moulded. Rs. 1,000/- (e) For 4 iron sheet chimneys each 32 feet long. Rs. 2,000/- (f) For brick-kilns of the capacity of 6 lakhs and 8 lakhs bricks respectively. Rs. 20,000/- (g) For carriage including loading and unloading of 250 tons of coal from the site of the kiln to the new site which is at a distance of 3 1/2 miles from the site of the kilns in dispute. Rs. 1,250/- (h) For 6,60,000 moulded kutcha bricks left in the fields which were ready for being placed for burning the kiln. Rs. 4,000/- (i) Compensation for change of place of business from Dhulkot to ambala-Hissar Road at a distance of 3 1/2 miles from the site of the kilns. Rs. 40,000/- (j) For all weather approach road connecting Ambala-Kalka road to kiln site 340 ft. long and 20 ft. wide. Rs. 2,000/- (k) For the lease money paid to the lessors for the period upto 1960. Rs. 5,137/- (l) Compensation for compulsory acquisition at 15 per cent. Rs. 12,270/- (m) Interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from May 1, 1957 to september 14, 1959. Rs. 13,405/-Total:-- Rs. 1,07,475/- (n) Interest from September 14, 1959, to the date of payment at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum. The Collector forwarded that application to the District Judge, Ambala, for disposal. The Union of India opposed the application by filing a written statement. The learned District Judge framed the following issues for trial:- 1. Whether the Collector took possession of the kiln sites on April 30, 1957 ? 2. Whether the brick-bats worth Rs. 913/- belonging to the claimant were lying at the kiln sites at the time of taking possession and were not allowed to be removed ? 3. Whether the two rooms worth Rs. 2,000/- belonging to the claimant were present at the acquired site and the claimant could not remove them? If so. whether he is entitled to compensation on this account? 4. Whether a well of the value of Rs. 3,500/- belonging to the claimant was present in the acquired site? If so, whether he is entitled to compensation on this account? 5. Whether the claimant had constructed five hundred feet long channel on the acquired site worth Rs. 1,000/- for carrying water from the well to another place for preparation of bricks? If so, whether he is entitled to compensation on this account? 6. Whether four iron sheet chimneys, each 32 feet long, of the value of rupees 2,000/- belonging to the claimant remained at the acquired site and the claimant could not remove them? If so, whether he is entitled to compensation on this account? 7. Whether the claimant had constructed two bricks kilns on the acquired site at a cost of Rs. 20,000/- ? If so, whether he is entitled to compensation on this account? 8. Whether in consequences of the acquisition, the claimant had to remove 250 tons of coal from the site of the kiln to the new site at the cost of Rs. 1,250/- ? If so, whether he is entitled to compensation on this account? 9. Whether in consequence of the acquisition the claimant was forced to abandon 6,60,000/- moulded kutcha bricks at the acquired site of the value of Rupees 4,000/- ? If so, whether the claimant is entitled to compensation on this account? 10 Whether in consequence of acquisition the claimant was forced to change his place of business from Dhulkot to Ambala-Hissar road and is entitled to compensation in the amount of Rupees 40,000/- on this account? 11. Whether the claimant had constructed an all-weather approach road at a cost of Rs. 2,000/- for the old brick kiln, which he had to abandon as a result of acquisition? If so, whether he is entitled to compensation on this account and how much? 12. Whether the claimant had paid a sum of Rs. 5,137/- to the lessors for the acquired premises for the period upto 1960? If so, whether he is entitled to be compensated on this account? 13. What interest, if any, the claimant is entitled to on the amount of compensation? 14. Relief.
(3.) AFTER recording evidence and hearing arguments, the learned District Judge allowed the sum of Rs. 8,700/- by way of compensation and 15 per cent, solatium thereon. The interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum on the aggregate amount was also directed to be paid from the date of taking possession of the acquired land to the date of actual payment. The learned District Judge awarded rs. 950/- under issue No. 6, Rs. 6,000/- under issue No. 7, Rs. 1,250/-under issue No. 8, Rs. 500/- under issues No. 11 and rejected the claims under other issues. The claimant has filed his present appeal claiming the amount of Rs. 98,775/-, that is, the difference between the amount claimed and the amount allowed to him by the District Judge. On the other hand, the Union of India has filed the appeal challenging the award of Rs. 8,700/-made in favour of the claimant.;