D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.12.1996 and corresponding Award dated 16.12.1996 passed by the Sub -Judge, 1st, Garhwa in Land Acquisition Case No. 36 of 1994, whereby the learned Court below had enhanced the market value of the land acquired by the appellant. Land Acquisition Case No. 36 of 1994 had arisen on account of reference made under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "L.A. Act"). The land comprising total area of 3.3 acres within khata No. 1 and khata No. 4 appertaining to several sub plots belonging to the respondents was acquired by the State Government for the purpose of construction of residential houses and inspection bungalows under Dhanpur scheme for the Government Irrigation Department at village Bishunpur within P.S. Garhwa. Notification under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act was issued and published in the Government Gazette on 1.11.1975, a copy of which was served on the land owner on 26.12.1975 and in response to which, the land owner had filed his objection. Further notification under Sec. 6 of the Act was issued and published in the official Gazette on 1.12.1976. This was followed by notice under section of the Act, which was served on the owner on 25.4.1977. Inquiry under Sec. 11 of the Act was conducted by the Collector/Land Acquisition Officer by making spot inspection of the land. The Land Acquisition Officer, on inspection, had categorized the total lands under two heads, namely, Tand III and Dhan III lands. Submitting his report of inquiry (Ext. 2 -A), the Land Acquisition Officer had assessed the value of the lands in Tand -III category at Rs. 21,333/ - per acre and the lands in Dhan -III category at Rs. 26,667/ - per acre. Being aggrieved, the owner/respondent filed his objection against the amount of compensation, as assessed by the Collector, whereupon the dispute was referred to the learned Court below for adjudication under Sec. 18 of the L.A. Act. The owner had contested the matter before the Reference Court, claiming that the market value of the lands acquired was much higher than what was assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer since the land is situated in a prime locality near the vicinity of the civil Court, Garhwa, Garhwa Hospital Garhwa Post Office, College, State Bank of India and is situated by the side of Garhwa Muri Semar Main Road and there are several Government offices and residential buildings situated near the land. It was also pointed out that there was several valuable trees standing on the land, the total cost of which could not be less than Rs. 10,000.00 , whereas the Land Acquisition Officer has arbitrarily assessed the value of the trees at Rs. 2,000.00 only. Emphasis was placed by the owner on the report of the Land Acquisition Officer (Ext. 2 -A) wherein the Land Acquisition Officer had himself observed that according to the prevailing market value, the lands within the adjoining municipal area are being sold at Rs. 2.00 lakhs per acre and yet, without offering any reasonable explanation as to why the lands under reference in this case should not fetch the same value, the Land Acquisition Officer had assessed a very meager amount.
(2.) AFTER hearing both the parties the Reference Court vide its order dated 3rd December, 1996, increased the amount of compensation by assessing the market value of the land at higher rale and awarded lump -sum compensation of Rs. 4.00 lakhs for the entire 3.3 acres of land acquired, with an additional compensation ? amount of 30%, as provided under Sec. 20(A) of the L.A. Act, besides imposing interest at the rate of 9% on the enhanced amount calculated till the date of delivery of possession and thereafter, at the rate of 15% of the enhanced amount till the date of final realization. It is against this order, the appellant State has filed the instant appeal. Assailing the impugned order, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned is bad on points of law as well as on facts and that the findings arrived at by the learned Court below is based entirely on conjectures and surmises and hypothetical assumption. It is further submitted that the learned Court below has failed to consider that in respect of a portion of the land measuring 0.38 acres within the same plot of the respondents, the same learned Court had awarded compensation of Rs. 12,000.00 per acre vide order passed in L.A. Case No. 155 of 1986. It is further argued that the learned Court below has assessed the compensation on the basis of potential value of the land even without there being any evidence to support the same. It has also been urged that the learned Court below has erred in placing reliance on a passing remark recorded in the order of the Land Acquisition Officer (Ext. 2 -A) that on or about the date of acquisition, land adjacent to the lands under reference in this case, was sold at Rs. 2.00 lakhs per acre, although to the same order, the Land Acquisition Officer after considering the sale -deeds in respect of the lands nearer to the lands under reference, has assessed the value at Rs. 26,667/ - per acre as maximum rate for Dhan -III land.
(3.) RESPONDENTS have also filed their cross -objection against the quantum of compensation assessed and fixed by the reference Court. Learned Counsel for the respondents would refute the entire grounds of the appellants claiming on the other hand that the compensation as assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer, is unreasonably low as it does not reflect the actual market value of the land prevailing on the date of acquisition. Placing heavy reliance on Ext. 2 -A, learned Counsel submits that the total compensation should have been above Rs. 8.00 lakhs for the lands acquired besides a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 as compensation for the trees standing on the lands. Learned Counsel adds further that the nature of the land has been clearly stated in the order of the Land Acquisition Officer (Ext. 2 -A) which would confirm that the land is adjacent to the main road within Garhwa municipality and the plots of land adjacent to the land under reference, have been purchased by private individuals for the purposes of constructing houses and in fact, the present land has also been acquired for the purposes of constructing nouses and inspection bungalow for the Government litigation Department. As such, the future prospects and the potential value of the land acquired, need also to be considered for assessment of the payable amount of compensation.;