TMI Blog1980 (7) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Engineers. It will be relevant to state that the Public Works Department values buildings on the basis of plinth area. The respondents (hereinafter called 'claimants') being aggrieved by the award of the Collector filed objections under Section 18 (in some cases under Section 30) of the Act to the Colletcor. Objections having been raised, the Collector referred the matter to the Civil Court. Reference cases were accordingly instituted. They were heard and disposed of by Special Land Acquisition Judge. The Special Land Acquisition Judge enhanced the compensation for vacant lands on the basis of their market value. The compensation for buildings was awarded by the Civil Court on the basis of their capital value assessed on the basis of 20 years annual income. 3. F. A. Nos. 437 and 440 of 1969. In regard to the vacant lands the Collector had awarded compensation at the rate of ₹ 53,525 per acre. This would work out roughly at ₹ 960 per katha. The Civil Court enhanced the compensation to ₹ 3,000 per decimal, i.e. .01 acres. It would be relevant to state here that in the district of Dhanbad .015 acres is roughly equal to one Katha. Learned Governm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ernment Pleader submitted that as the lands in those transactions were on Bhuli Road line as the lands under acquisition, the values shown in those transactions were better guide than the transaction in 1957. There are several difficulties in accepting this submission and accepting the two transactions of 1961 as a better guide. The first difficulty is that there is no evidence on the record to show that the land acquisitions were on Bhuli road. The second difficulty is that we have no idea on the basis of the record, the length of Bhuli road. It is therefore, difficult to predicate the distance between the lands acquired and the lands covered by the two transactions on which the Land Acquisition Officer placed reliance. There being no common denominator between the transactions of 1957 and 1961, it will be difficult to hold that the sales shown in the rate report were better guide in regard to assessment of compensation. For those reasons also we are inclined in agreement with the Learned Special Land Acquisition Judge to accept Ext. 9 as the best indicator of the value of the lands under acquisition. The above appeals with regard to the value of lands by State are, therefore, dev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the objection. Question for consideration is how far the claimant has proved that the amounts shown as rent payable by the tenants have been established as such. The claimant C.S. Thacker has examined himself as claimant witness No. 9. He stated in his evidence that he had got the shops as gift from his father. The tenants in the shops were Pratap Singh Mahammad Quayum, Chain Stores, and Mahammad Quddus. In para 2 he has given out the rents that the individual tenants were paying, the total of which would be ₹ 460 per month. The claimant witness No. 8 Jawahar Lal Majumdar corroborated C.S. Thacker in all material particulars. He deposed in pars 5 that C.S. Thacker had six to seven tenants. In 1962 at the time of notification, according to him, C.S. Thacker had five tenants and he was getting ₹ 460 per month as rent. Mahammad Quayum claimant witness No. 1, is one of the persons, who was a tenant in the shop of C.S. Thacker. He deposed that he was a tenant and that he was paying ₹ 70 per month as rent. Trilok Singh (C. W._ 6) was another tenant of C.S. Thacker. hE was proprietor of Bihar Tile Trading Company. He deposed that he was a tenant of C.S. Thacker in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , there is no scope for grievance to either party. The finding in that regard is well merited and must be maintained. The appeals by the State in that behalf are without merit and must be dismissed. 9. F. A. Nos. 439 and 442 of 1969- These two appeals are also in relation to value of buildings. In the buildings owned by Jyoti Finance Company there were twenty shops with twenty tenants. The Civil Court found that the monthly income from the shops was ₹ 925. These shops were owned by Jyoti Finance Company which was a partnership firm. The partners were all daughters of S.K. Thacker. The Civil Court drew up a chart of rent which was being received by S.K. Thacker, the predecessor-in-interest of Jyoti Finance Company and another chart of rent received by Jyoti Finance Company. The successor-in-interest came into possession of the shops in 1960. According to Jyoti Finance Company, they were receiving monthly rent totalling ₹ 1,605. These were sums admitted by claimants as having been received by them. Learned Government Pleader submitted that there was paucity of evidence for coming to the conclusion that the amounts showing in the chart had been received by S.K. Thack ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Finance Company or of any of the claimants were in regard to the receipts granted in May, 1962 and not later and that no counter-foil has been produced for period prior thereto. The fact that most of the counter-foils are for receipts granted in May, 1962 is correct, but the inference which learned Government Pleader has persuaded us to hold is untenable. The Civil Court was concerned with the rent which the claimants were receiving prior to the notification. The claimants, therefore, may well have been under the impression that any receipt prior to the notification would serve the purpose and that there was no use multiplying documents and making the records bulky. In that view of the matter, we are unable to accept the submission urged on behalf of learned Government Pleader that the counter-foil books do not show that the tenants were paying the rent as claimed by Jyoti Finance Company. In these appeals also inference adverse to the State must be drawn from the fact that the Land Acquisition Officer had received a list of tenants and the rents paid by them which has been withheld by the State. The Land Acquisition Officer, having received a list of tenants and the rents paid by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im for increase in compensation will not be permitted, but it must not be lost sight of that Section 9 (3) of the Act enjoins upon the Collector to serve notice upon the occupier and on all such persons known or believed to be interested therein. Section 25 (1) of the Act lays down that when an applicant has made a claim to compensation, pursuant to any notice given under Section 9, the amount awarded shall not exceed the amount so claimed. The expression pursuant to any notice given under Section 9 is rather significant and cannot be lost sight of. In order to non-suit a claimant for enhancing compensation on the ground of want of objection under Section 9, it is obligatory that notice under Section 9 must have been served upon the claimant. In the absence of any material to show that notice under Section 9 of the Act had been served, it will be difficult to apply the bar of Section 25 (1) of the Act. Learned Government Pleader failed to bring to our notice any material showing that no objection had been filed under Section 9 (3) of the Act. It was contended by him that it was impossible for the State to have proved in the negative that no objection was filed by the claimants. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notice under Section 9 of the Act 22 applications regarding claims to compensation have been received and enquired into and orders have been passed on them separately. The land is situated on Dhanbad Jharia Road (near Ray Talkies). The land under acquisition has been classified as Bazar land. There are structures over the land under aquisition. The measurement and valuation of the structures have been done by Executive Engineer, P.W.D., Division No. 1 . We have not the least doubt that the claimants had filed objections under Section 9 of the Act. The above observation clearly shows that 22 objections had been filed. If the State wanted to take advantage of the bar of Section 25 (1), it was obligatory upon the State to state clearly who had filed objection and who had not filed That not having been done, it must be accepted that the claimants in these appeals had filed objections under Section 9 of the Act, more so, the submission of learned Government Pleader is based upon a question of fact. That question of fact should have been specifically urged before the Special Land Acquisition Judge. If the objections had been raised the claimants would have been in a position to show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
