1 / 5 2025:CGHC:3165 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FAM No. 263 of 20 19 • Ramadhar Suryavanshi S/o Late Dhajaram Sruyavanshi Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Bitkula, Tehsil- Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant/ Plaintiff versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh through Collector Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgar 2. Sub Divisional Officer Revenue, Masturi, Disrtict- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Executive Engineer Department of Irrigation, Kharang, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4. Sub Divisional Officer Cum Land Acquisition Officer Masturi, Tehsil- Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Nasimuddin Ansari, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Advocate General along with Mr. Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judg e ORDER ON BOARD 16/01/2025 1. This appeal is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 1894”) against the order passed by First Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in M.J.C. No. 158/2017 on a reference being made by the Collector under Section 18 of the Act of 1894. 2. Facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the land bearing khasra No. 408/01, 408/2 measuring 0.16 acre, owned by father of appellant, was subject matter of acquisition by the respondents under the Act of 1894. A PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 5 notice under Section 4 of the Act of 1894 was published and after following due procedure of law, the land acquisition officer passed an award awarding total sum of Rs. 48,458/-. Aggrieved with the quantum of compensation determined by the land acquisition officer, appellant submitted an application on 18.02.2014 before Respondent No. 1/ Collector with a prayer that he be awarded total sum of Rs. 6,40,000/- as compensation of the land. Respondent No. 1/ Collector considering the grounds raised in the application has referred the matter to the District Judge, Bilaspur for determining the amount of compensation, accordingly the impugned award was passed by First Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs. 48,458/- to Rs. 62,760/- and further awarded interest under the provisions of Section 28 of the Act of 1894 on the enhanced amount of compensation. 3. Mr. Nasimuddin Ansari, learned counsel for appellant submits that the land which was subject matter of acquisition was situated within 13 meters from the house of Mansaram Banjare. Earlier on the land, house was situated and therefore the nature of land of appellant which was subject matter of acquisition was a residential land. The amount of compensation ought to have been calculated considering the nature of land of appellant to be a residential land, however, the land of appellant was assessed to be a unirrigated agricultural land. Accordingly the amount of compensation calculated is on lower side. 4. Mr. P.N. Bharat, learned Advocate General opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellant and would submit that learned Additional District Judge has passed the impugned award upon appreciation of the pleadings and evidence available on record. The award passed is just and proper and is in accordance with law, hence, it does not call for any interference. He contended that no evidence is brought before the District Judge that the land which is owned and subject matter of acquisition is a diverted land to be used for residential purpose. 3 / 5 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record of reference case. 6. Perusal of application Ext. P-3 filed before the Collector on 06.01.2014 would show that in paragraph 3 appellant has pleaded that his land is situated within 13 meters from the house of Mansaram Banjare and is adjacent to road. It is further mentioned that after purchase of the land his father has converted it to the agricultural field and was earning his livelihood by sowing paddy, gram and pea crops. 7. Appellant in support of his claim has examined himself as AW-1. In examination in-chief, in paragraph 5, he also stated that his land is situated within 13 meters from the house of Mansaram Satnami and is suitable for residential purpose. In the said paragraph it is also mentioned that prior to 50 years there were 2-3 houses situated over the said land and Patwari has given the certificate in this regard. In paragraph 17, it is stated that out of total land of khasra No. 408/1 and 408/2, 0.16 dismil of land was acquired and rest of the land is still remaining. 8. Mr. Anandram is examined as AW-2. In cross-examination, he stated that earlier one house was situated over the land owned by appellant. 9. From the aforementioned evidence brought on record by the appellant before the Additional District Judge, it is prima facie appearing that on the date of acquisition of land no residential accommodation/ house was situated over the land and further from the application submitted before the Collector seeking reference, purported to be under Section 18, for enhancement of the amount of compensation, there is specific pleading of appellant that his father was doing agricultural activities by sowing paddy, gram and pea crops for the purpose of earning his livelihood. The nature of land owned by appellant and subject matter of the acquisition as per his own pleading was an agricultural land and therefore the submission of learned counsel for appellant that the land is a residential land is not sustainable and to that extent I do not find any error in the impugned award passed by Additional District Judge. Learned 4 / 5 Additional District Judge considering the prevailing market value of the land as per the guidelines issued by the Registrar of the concerned district has enhanced the amount of compensation which in view of the status of the land, as considered by the Additional District Judge is not challenged to be erroneous, hence, it does not call for any interference. 10. Learned Additional District Judge in paragraph 12 of the impugned award has awarded interest in terms of Section 28 of the Act of 1894 @ 9% p.a. from the date of acquisition and further held that if the amount is not deposited within 01 year from the date of award, the excess amount of compensation awarded shall carry interest @ 15% p.a. Learned Additional District Judge while awarding the interest on the enhanced amount of compensation has only taken note of the provision under Section 28 and escaped consideration of the provision under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act of 1894 which provides for the interest @ 12% p.a. on amount of compensation from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 sub-section 1 in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. Though the specific pleading in this regard is not made in the application under Section 18 of the Act of 1894 filed before the Collector which was referred for consideration before the Additional District Judge under Section 18, however, the award of interest under Section 23(1-A) of the Act of 1894 is statutory and consequential and therefore in the opinion of this Court, appellant is entitled for the interest as provided under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act of 1894 on the enhanced amount of compensation as awarded by the Additional District Judge. 11. For the foregoing discussion, the claim of appellant that the land as owned and acquired by the respondents is a residential land is rejected. The amount of compensation as calculated by the Additional District Judge in M.J.C. No. 158/17 is affirmed. However, the award of interest is modified to the extent that the appellant shall be entitled for the interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act of 1894 till the date of 5 / 5 passing of the award of the enhanced amount of compensation by the Additional District Judge in M.J.C. No. 158/17. Thereafter, the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest in terms of Section 28 of the Act of 1894 @ 9% p.a. for a period of 01 year from the date of passing of award by the Additional District Judge and after one year the said enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 15% p.a. 12. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE