AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.—The claimants before the Reference Court in a reference u/s 28 A(3) are the appellants. They did not seek a reference u/s 18. However, on coming to know that the Reference Court in LAR No. 16/1988 had enhanced the market value payable to certain other claimants who sought for reference u/s 18, they filed application u/s 28A. The above application was rejected by the Land Acquisition Officer. The appellants filed a subsequent application u/s 28A based on the court award in LAR No. 120/87. Under that court award, the Reference Court had refixed the value of the land at Rs. 1500/- per cent. Once again the Land Acquisition Officer did not allow the application. Hence, reference u/s 28A (3). The grievance voiced by the appellants is that the Reference Court did not award them the value refixed in LAR No. 120/1987, but awarded them only Rs. 1,200/- per cent. In this appeal, the claim of the appellants is that the value of their land be refixed at Rs. 1,500/- per cent.
Sri. S. Jamal, learned senior Government Pleader points out that it was not the same rate which the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded land value to the appellants and the parties in LAR No. 120/1987. To the appellants the Land Acquisition Officer awarded only Rs. 435/- per cent where as to the parties in LAR No. 120/1987, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs. 466/- per cent. The Government Pleader also submitted that the property involved in this appeal is a large extent exceeding two acres. Therefore, proper deduction has to be made for the largeness of the extent involved. We find force in the above submissions of the learned senior Government Pleader. The amount to which the appellants ordinarily become eligible on the basis of LAR No. 120/87 is Rs. 1,400/- per cent. Considering the largeness of the extent, we are inclined to make deduction following the principles laid by the Supreme Court in Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Collector, Gadwal Vs. Smt. Sreelatha Bhoopal and another, , Gafar and Others Vs. Moradabad Development Authority and Another, and State of Jammu & Kashmir Vs. Mohammad Mateen Wani and Others, . We therefore, allow this appeal refixing the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs. 1250/- per cent, which means that over and above what has been awarded by the Reference Court under the impugned judgment, the appellants will get 50/- rupees per cent more.