VIKRAMADITYA PRASAD, J. - (1.) AS these three appeals arise out of a common judgment and award passed by the Special Sub - Judge in I.A Case Nos. 17 of 1993, 18 of 1993 and 19 of 1993, whereby and whereunder the learned Court fixed the rate of done and Tand land at the rate of Ks. 500.00 and 400.00 per decimals respectively. besides the Court also directed for payment of solatium @ 30% and 9% Interest for one year and 15% Interest after one year on enhanced amount, accordingly the Award of the Collector all the three cases was modified, hence they have been taken together and are being disposed of by a common Judgment. All the lands were of village Tumang, Police Station Khelari. District Ranchi and all the claimants have received compensation awarded by the Collector on protest.
(2.) ADMITTEDLY by declaration No. 1 of 1986 -87 dated 16.2.1986 published in page No. 227 and 228 Part -2 of the Bihar Gazette under Sec.18 of the Bihar Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the lands of the following claimants -respondents situated at village Tumang, P.S. Khelari, District Ranchi were acquired by the appellant State of Bihar for opening of the caste mining operation of C.C.I, and latter compensation was awarded by the Collector which are noted below against each of the claimants respondent : Appeal No. LA Case No.Name of the claimantsArea of land acquiredCollectorCompensations Court 'scompensationClaimed compensation received compensation. 10 of 1995 R 17 of 1993Suresh Prasad 2.48 acresRs. 54,529.37 paise Rs. 1,28,939.66 Rs. 2000 per decimal Rs. 54,529.00 paise. 16 of 1995 R. 18 of 1993Shyam Kishore Saw 2.84 acresRs. 59,039.00 paise Rs. 1,53,349/ -Rs. 2000 per decimal Rs. 59039.00 paise. The common case of the appellants are that the compensation awarded by the collector was not adequate and fair. The lands were Class I done lands and the claimants were raising two crops annually paddy crops and rabby crops and the price of the lands acquired is not less than Rs. 2000.00 per decimals and the claimants are also entitled to get statutory compensation like solatium, statutory interest provided under the Land Acquisition Act.
(3.) BEFORE the Land Acquisition Court two witnesses were examined on behalf of the claimants and one witness was examined on behalf of the State -opposite party. CW 1 was the husband of one of the claimant 'sSabita Devi and he was also the brother in law of the claimant of I.A. Case No. 17 of 1993 and in LA.S. Case No. 18 of 1993 he himself was the party. He said that all the acquired lands are located at one place and this was acquired for construction of quarters of the C.C.I, and at the relevant time when the land as ac -quired, the rate was Rs. 2.000.00 per decimal. He further said that near the land there are Cement factory, school college and colliery, namely, Dakra colliery and culvert etc. He has further stated that in the village some other lands have also been acquired. He lias admitted that in respect of that reference was made and L. A. Case Nos. 14 of 1992 to 18 of 1992 were instituted in respect of Bachra colliery. When Hie land was acquired the Land Acquisition Judge fixed the rate of lands at the rate of Rs. 1,00,000.00 per Acre. In cross -examination lie said that the land acquired as cultivable land and within the land there was coal. He also said that there was no source of irrigation but he irrigates the land from a well. He admitted that no land was purchased or sold by him. He has further admitted that the Government of officials had gone then he had shown the Patta to them. He claimed to possess the paper showing the rate of the land at the rate of Rs. 40.000.00 to 50.000.00 per acre and he had shown it to the Government officials. CW 2 was from Nawadih. He has stated that at the time of acquisition the rate of the land was Rs. 2000.00 per decimal and therefore, it was acquired by the C.C.I. and nearby the land there are Dakra and Bechra colliery, besides the cement factory. He admitted that nearby the land there are quarters of C.C.I, In cross -examination he said that the land acquired was raiyati land. It had been taken for cultivation. The land was agricultural land and has no relation with the colliery. He has admitted that he has no concern with the disputed land neither he had made any sale or purchase but he admitted that the Government Officials had gone on the land and he had shown the land. Thus, from the evidence of these two witnesses, this much has been clear that the land was cultivable land but no witness has said that what was the income from the land per year. The land was in the vicinity of some mines and college and hospital. ;