Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


State Of U.P. v. Jagdish Prasad - FIRST APPEAL No. 522 of 1982 [2007] RD-AH 13781 (8 August 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


     Court No.1

First Appeal No. 522 of 1982

State of U.P ..... Appellant


Jagdish Prasad Sahu ......Respondent


Hon'ble Prakash Krishna.

Heard Shri R.C.Srivastava,learned standing counsel for the appellant and Shri Vivek Prasad Mathur,learned counsel for the respondent.

Raising a short controversy with regard to the market value of the land on the relevant date, the present appeal is at the instance of the State of U.P against the judgement and award dated 8.4.1982 passed by the District Judge, Basti in Misc. (Land Acquisition  Reference)  Case No. 67 of 1980, arising out of Land Acquisition  Case No. 115 of 1972.

The disputes relates to Plot No. 70-M measuring  2 Bigha 10 Biswa situate in Village Aurh Jungle, Tappa Kithila, Pargana Basti East, Tahsil and District Basti.  The State Government  acquired the aforesaid land of the claimant-respondent for its free distribution,  to the members of scheduled caste,  backward class,  landless labourers and Village artisan etc. under  the "Gramin Awas Yojna".   A notification under section 4(1) of the  Land Acquisition Act was published on 12.10.1974.  It was followed by notification under section 6 of the afore stated Act which was published in the gazette  on 29.10.1974.  The possession was taken on 29.6.1976.  The Collector by its award  dated 11.2.1980 determined the amount of compensation  for the land thus acquired and awarded  a sum of Rs.6672.19.  The said  award was challenged by the claimant-respondent by filing a reference petition  and the matter was referred  to the Civil Court for determination  of the market value on the relevant date.

A cross objection for further enhancement of the compensation amount has been filed by the respondent.

The other issues,  except as to the market value of the land  acquired,  are not under  challenge in the present appeal.

The reference Court determined the market value of the land at Rs.5000/-  per bigha.  It has taken into consideration  the sale deed dated 26.6.1974 as the best exemplar  to determine the market value on the relevant date of notification of the acquired land.  By means of the afore stated sale deed a piece of land measuring 3 Bigha, 18 Biswa 17 Dhur were sold and the average price  comes to Rs. 5000/- per Bigha.   Thus the market value of the acquired land (2 Bighas 10 Biswas of the claimant respondent  comes to Rs.12,500/-. The said sale deed is quite proximate  in time to the relevant date i.e 12.10.1974.  The reference Court has found that there is no evidence on record to show that  there has been a price escalation after the publication of the notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition  Act.  Having considered the argument of the learned counsel  for the appellant  that the sale deed should not be taken as exemplar, I do not find any error in the judgement of the Court below treating the sale deed dated 26.6.1974 as the best exemplar.   On the facts of the case, on hand, the reference Court  has rightly treated the said sale deed as the best exemplar to determine the market value of the acquired land.

A cross objection  has been preferred  by the claimant-respondent  for enhancement of the amount of compensation.  Shri V.P.Mathur, Advocate for the claimant-respondent  pointed out  that the selling price in pursuance of the sale deed dated 26.6.1974 comes to 5385.12 per Bigha.   The submission is that the same rate should have been taken into consideration while awarding compensation.   From the document it appears that another piece of land was sold at a lesser  price  at  Rs.4756.34 per Bigha  for that land.  It was submitted that this land was of  inferior quality as there was pit.   He could not refer any evidence in support of the aforesaid plea.  Therefore, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the reference Court has rightly  fixed the compensation amount  @ Rs. 5000/- per bigha.

There is no merit in the cross objection also.   The appeal and cross objection are dismissed.  No other point was pressed.  No order as to costs.

Date 8.8.2007


(Prakash Krishna)


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.