Misc. Case No. 107 of 2010 · The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 State of Odisha ....... Appellant -Versus- Pitabash Khatua & others ....... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Nikhil Pratap, Addl. Standing Counsel For Respondents : Mr. M.K. Panda, Advocate ---------------------------- P R E S E N T: MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Hearing: 16.10.2023 Date of Judgment: 31.10.2023 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S.K. Mishra, J. The present Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment dated 19.01.2012 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kamakhyanagar in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010, vide which the Court below enhanced the compensation for acquiring various kind of trees based on Judgment passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.42 of 2006 so also following the principle of parity as detailed in Paragraph-9.6 of the impugned Judgment. 2.
Legal Reasoning
The brief background facts which lead to filing of the present Appeal under Section-54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is, an area of Ac.1.28 decimals of Sarada-III Kisam of land appertaining to Plot No.278/1896 in Mouza Baghua under Kamakhyanagar P.S. in the District of Dhenkanal belonging to the Respondents was acquired by the State Government under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in short, ‘the Act’ vide Gazette Notification dated 06.08.1998, which was published on 02.09.1998 for the purpose of Rengali Irrigation Project. Pursuant to the same, an enquiry was conducted under Section-11 of the Act. After taking into consideration all contemporaneous materials pertaining to the acquired land and its vicinity, compensation payable for the acquired land was determined @ Rs.50,000/- per acre. In total the Respondents were paid a sum of Rs.1,38,275/- towards compensation for acquiring the land, including Rs.22,497/- towards the trees standing over the acquired land and Rs.11,408/- towards the tank. However, the Respondents received the said amount under protest. Thereafter, in a reference made under Section-18 of the Act, which was registered as L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010, the referral Court vide Judgment/Award dated 19.01.2012 ,relying on an earlier award of the referral Court L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 2 of 8 under Ext.2, enhanced the quantum of compensation in respect of the trees standing over the acquired land i.e. @ Rs.200/- towards each Kendu tree, @ Rs.600/- towards each Kaju tree, @ Rs.1000/- towards each Sunari tree and @ Rs.1000/- towards each Khira tree along with other statutory benefits available under the Act. Hence, this Appeal. 3. Though this Appeal has been preferred on various
Legal Reasoning
grounds as detailed in Memorandum of Appeal, Mr. Pratap, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State/Appellant confined his argument to Ground Nos.‘E & F’ and submitted that the impugned Award is bad as the referral Court enhanced the rate of compensation of trees in absence of any cogent evidence to substantiate the said claim for enhancement of the value of the trees and the same was exorbitantly enhanced relying on an earlier Award passed by the referral Court marked as Ext.2. 4. In response to the said argument advanced by Mr. Pratap, Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Respondents, drawing attention of this Court to various paragraphs of the impugned Judgment/Award submitted that the referral Court rightly enhanced the compensation amount with regard to trees on the basis of Award rendered in L.A. Misc. Case No.42 of 2006, as the L.A. Collector determined the valuation of varieties of trees on the basis of the approved price as on 14.07.1975, which were the rates L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 3 of 8 23 years prior to the date of Notification dated 08.01.1998 made under Section 4(1) of the Act. Mr. Panda further submitted that to demonstrate such perversity before the referral Court, the said document was exhibited from the side of the present Respondents as Ext.6. He further submitted that in L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of 2010, relying on the Judgment passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.42 of 2006 (Ext.2), the referral Court enhanced the compensation for various kinds of trees such as Kendu @ Rs.200/- per tree, Mango @ Rs.600/- per tree, Maniga (Sajana) @ R.500/- per tree, Chara @ Rs.400/- per tree and Kalicha @ Rs.300/- per tree. Being aggrieved by the said award passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of 2010, the State preferred L.A.A. No.120 of 2013, which was dismissed on 09.09.2017 in the National Lok Adalat in absence of the Respondent in the said Appeal, as the learned Counsel for the State/Appellant in presence of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Rengali Left Canal, made a submission that the impugned Award in the said Appeal has already been satisfied and nothing remains to be decided in the said Appeal. 5. By filing a comparative chart to demonstrate before this Court that the issue involved in the present Appeal is identical to the issues in L.A. Misc. Case Nos.104, 106 & 107 of 2010, Mr. Panda further submitted that in all the said Misc. Cases, the notification and villages are same, whereas the plots on which the L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 4 of 8 said trees were standing, are adjacent plots. Relying on the said comparative chart, Mr. Panda further submitted that in L.A. Misc. Case No.106 of 2010, in identical situation, the compensation amount pertaining to Kendu tree, Kaju tree, Aswath tree and Mango tree were enhanced by the referral Court. However, the said Award was worked out by the State/Appellant without preferring an Appeal against the award passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.106 of 2010. Mr. Panda also submitted that the species of trees dealt by the referral Court in the Awards passed in L.A. Misc. Case Nos.104, 106 & 107 of 2010, covers almost all the species of trees involved in the present appeal. The said submission made by Mr. Panda is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the State/Appellant. 6. Since neither the Counsel for the State/Appellant nor Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Respondents had copy of the order passed in L.A.A. No.120 of 2013, the record of the said Appeal being called for, it is ascertained that on 09.09.2017, the following order was passed by the Lok Adalata: “This case is taken up today in the National Lok Adalat. Mr. J. Patra, learned counsel for the appellant along with Sri Nigamananda Panda, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Rengali Left Canal are present. None appears for the respondent when the matter is called. L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 5 of 8 Mr. Patra submits that the award passed has already been satisfied and nothing remains to be decided in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. Registry is directed to intimate all concerned.” (Emphasis Supplied) 7. That apart, the L.C.R. being called for, it is ascertained that in Judgment dated 25.10.2011 passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of 2010, which was marked as Ext-3 without any objection, the referral Court enhanced the rate of trees, as has been done in the impugned award in this Appeal, with an observation that the determination of the L.A. Collector with regard to valuation of variety of trees being based on approved price as on 14.07.1975, which was marked as Ext.6 in the said case, is perverse and distorted one. On further examination of the L.C.R., it is found that the same Working Sheet marked as Ext.6 in L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of 2010, has been marked as Ext.8 in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010 and letter of the Divisional Forest Officer, Deogarh Division, which was marked as Ext.9 in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010, is dated 31.01.1975, based on which the L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 6 of 8 L.A. Collector passed a perverse order with regard to valuation of various kinds of tree as detailed above. 8.
Decision
In view of the above, this Court is of the view that there is no perversity in the impugned Judgment dated 19.01.2012 passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010. Accordingly, the Appeal stands dismissed. As is ascertained from the order sheet of the case record, pursuant to order dated 04.09.2014 passed in Misc. Case No.199 of 2013, an amount of Rs.11,86,728/- was deposited by the State/Appellant followed by a further amount of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Court below in terms of order dated 21.11.2014 passed in Misc. Case No.191 of 2014. Hence, the entire amount with interest so also with all permissible statutory benefits, as ordered vide Judgment dated 19.01.2012 passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010, be worked out at the earliest. After deducting the amount already deposited before the referral Court as indicated above, the rest decreetal amount in terms of the said Judgment dated 19.01.2012 in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010 be deposited before the referral Court within a period of six weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 7 of 8 Judgment. On being so deposited, the entire amount be disbursed in favour of the present Respondents within two weeks thereafter. …….….…………………… S.K. MISHRA, J. Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 31st October, 2023/Prasant Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 02-Nov-2023 16:50:25 L.A.A. No.99 of 2013 Page 8 of 8