- (1.) THESE two appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 27-7-2007 (reported in 2008 (1) AIR jhar R 96) passed in First Appeal No. 37 of 1997 (R) with First Appeal No. 65 of 1997 (R), whereby learned single Judge allowed one of the appeals being F. A. No. 37 of 1997 and enhanced the amount of compensation, whereas F. A. No. 65 of 1997 has been dismissed.
(2.) THE facts of the case lie in a narrow compass : by notification dated 1-2-1982 published in Hazaribagh District Gazette under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, the State government sought to acquire land including 3. 97 acres of land of Khata No. 982 of village Jhumaritelaiya P. S. Koderma for construction of Krishi Bazar Samittee. Objections were invited from the owners of the lands. The respondent in possession of 3. 97 acres of land of Khata No. 982 filed objection for the release of the acquired lands and in alternative, for payment of compensation @ Rs. 30,000/- per katha. However, the land acquisition proceeding commenced and finally award was prepared in respect of the lands of the respondent, whereby compensation of Rs. 1,95,021/- was awarded. Thereafter, at the instance of the claimants-respondents, the matter was referred under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Special Land Acquisition Judge, koderma in Reference Case No. 779/92. The land Acquisition Judge, taking into consideration the facts and evidence adduced by the parties and also Ext. B, the recommendation made by the Land Acquisition Officer, determined the value of the acquired lands of the respondents @rs. 5000/- per kattha. Aggrieved by the said judgment of the Land Acquisition Judge, the appellant-Market Committee filed F. A. No. 65/97 and respondents-claimants filed F. A. No. 37/97 for enhancement of compensation. The learned single Judge, after re-appreciation of evidence, allowed the appeal filed by the claimants-respondents and held that the claimants-respondents are entitled to compensation @ Rs. 20,000/- per decimal. Consequently, f. A. No. 65/97 filed by the appellant-Market committee has been dismissed. Hence these letters patent appeals by the appellant-market committee.
(3.) WE have heard Mr. V. P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.;