Tayawwa vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer

Mohan M. Shantana Goudar, J.—The lands in Sy. Nos. 12 and 13 situated at Devanal Village of Bagalkot Taluk measuring 3 acres 18 guntas and 13 acres 20 guntas respectively, owned by the claimant/appellant, are acquired due to submersion under the Upper Krishna Project. The Preliminary Notification was passed on 11.02.1999. The award came to be passed on 31.08.2000 by the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarding compensation of Rs. 43,496/- per acre. The reference court, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, enhanced the compensation to Rs. 1,55,700/- per acre. This appeal is filed by the claimant praying for further enhancement of compensation.

Admittedly, the lands in question are irrigated lands. Out of the total extent of 16 acres 39 guntas, the claimant was growing sugar-cane in an area of 16 acres and was growing groundnut in 39 guntas of land. Thus, in our considered opinion, the reference court is justified in treating the entire lands as sugar-cane growing lands, particularly, when the lands in question are admittedly irrigated lands. The reference court has based its reasoning mainly on Ex. P-4/the Average Yield Certificate issued by the Assistant Director of Agriculture, Bagalkot, in respect of Bagalkot Taluk. The said Certificate reveals that the average yield of sugar-cane crop in Bagalkot Taluk was 86.50 tons per acre during the relevant period, which comes to 34.60 tons per acre. Ex. P.5 reveals that the sugar-cane was sold for Rs. 900/- per ton to M/s. Gems Sugar Factory. Since, the claimant was selling the sugar-cane to M/s. Gems Sugar factory, Rs. 900/- per ton is taken into consideration.

Sri. Jagadish Patil, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, has not disputed with regard to the price of sugar-cane at Rs. 900/- per ton during relevant time. However, according to him, the Court below is not justified in taking into consideration the average yield at 34.60 tons per acre as found in Ex. P-4. He submits that Ex. P-4 merely discloses the average yield of sugar-cane crop of Bagalkot Taluk. But, the lands in question, according to him, were yielding 70-80 tons of sugar-cane per acre.

The said submissions are opposed by the learned Government Advocate, who contends that the average yield, as disclosed in Ex. P-4, was justifiably taken into consideration by the Court below and therefore, no alteration need be made in that regard.

In the deposition, PW-1/claimant has deposed that the average yield of the lands in question was 70-80 tons per acre. Except denying such a suggestion in the deposition, no other material is found to discard the version of the claimant that the yield per acre of the lands in question would be more than 34.60 per ton, so also, there is no material to support the contention of the appellant that the yield of sugarcane per acre from the lands in question was 70-80 tons. This Court in MFA No. 20266/2009[LAC] has taken 50 tons per acre as the yield of sugar-cane in respect of the land belonging to Sharadal village, Bagalkot Taluk, which is said to be abutting to the village in question.

However, in MFA No. 1413/2001 connected with MFA Crob. No. 76/2002, this Court has taken the yield of the sugar-cane at 45 tons per acre.

Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we assess the income of sugar-cane at 45 tons per acre. As aforementioned, Ex. P-5 discloses that the price of sugar-cane during the relevant year was Rs. 900/- per month. So, the gross value comes to Rs. 900/- X 45 = Rs. 40,500/-. 50% has to be deducted towards the cost of cultivation and remaining 50% has to be multiplied by ''10'' in order to get the net market value, which comes to Rs. 2,02,500/-.

Accordingly, the following order is passed:--

"ORDER

(A) The compensation is enhanced to Rs. 2,02,500/- from Rs. 1,55,700/- per acre;

(B) The claimant is entitled to all the statutory benefits;

(C) The appeal is allowed with proprietary costs;

(D) It is made clear that the appellant is not entitled for the interest in respect of period of delay i.e., 2163 days in filing this miscellaneous first appeal."