Vishnudeo Narayan, J.
1. These appeals at the Instance of the appellant State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) have been preferred against the Impugned Judgment and award dated 26.05.1989 and 02.06.1989 respectively passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 311 of 1985, 326 of 1985, 338 of 1985, 340 of 1985. 341 of 1985, 347 of 1985, 348 of 1985, 351 of 1985, 352 of 1985, 353 of 1985, 354 of 1985, 357 of 1985, 358 of 1985, 359 of 1985, 362 of 1985, 364 of 1985, 365 of 1985, 366 of 1985, 368 of 1985, 370 of 1985, 372 of 1985, 373 of 1985, 380 of 1985, 383 of 1985, 384 of 1985, 393 of 1985, 394 of 1985, 401 of 1985, 404 of 1985, 405 of 1985, 407 of 1985, 411 of 1985, 420 of 1985, 421 of 1985, 429 of 1985, 435 of 1985, 437 of 1985, 438 of 1985, 441 of 1985, 442 of 1985, 444 of 1985, 445 of 1985, 446 of 1985, 447 of 1985, 449 of 1985, 453 of 1985, 458 of 1985, 460 of 1985, 468 of 1985, 469 of 1985, 470 of 1985, 472 of 1985, 473 of 1985, 475 of 1985, 476 of 1985, 477 of 1985, 478 of 1985, 479 of 1985, 481 of 1985, 482 of 1985, 485 of 1985, 486 of 1985, 490 of 1985, 491 of 1985, 492 of 1985, 493 of 1985, 495 of 1985, passed by Shri Krishna Kant Sahay, Land Acquisition Judge, Chas, Dhanbad (now Bokaro) whereby and whereunder the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) made by the respondents for determining the proper and adequate quantum of compensation for the land under acquisition were allowed and the compensation was determined at the flat rate of Rs. 10,000/-per acre and the respondents were also allowed solatium @ 30%, additional compensation under Section 23(1A) of the said Act @ 12% per annum from the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act till the date of the award prepared by the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land whichever Is earlier and also interest as per the provisions contained in Section 28 of the said Act.
2. The appellant State had acquired the land of the respondents situate in village Panchora, P.S. Marafari, District Dhanbad (now Bokaro) vide Land Acquisition Case No. 1/73-74 for erection of Iron and Steel Plant and its ancillary works and industries, its township and other works incidental thereto including rehabilitation as per plan enclosed of Bokaro Steel Plant and Notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act published in the Gazette on 1.5.1977 and the notification regarding declaration under Section 6 of the said Act was published on 1.7.1977 followed by relevant notification under Sections 7, 9 and 11 of the said Act and, thereafter, the possession of the acquired land was taken by the appellant-State on 30.1.1978. The land under acquisition is Paddy I, Paddy II, Paddy III, Tand I, Tand II, Tand III and Parti land. As per the sale report prepared by the Land Acquisition Authorities the compensation of Class I Paddy was determined @ Rs. 10,000/- per acre and compensation of the other land was proportionately determined and award was, accordingly, prepared in respect thereof in the name of the respondents by the Land Acquisition Authorities and the amount of compensation so determined by the Land Acquisition Authorities was paid to the respondents who received the compensation amount under protest.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that the Lower Court Record could not be received in these appeals due to the fact that they were destroyed in accordance with Rules and the Order No. 21 dated 16.7.2003 of the Court is relevant in this connection whereby both the parties were directed to file the copies of pleadings as well as oral and documentary evidence in their possession with three weeks failing which the appeal shall be heard. The aforesaid facts as contained in para 2 aforesaid has been stated as per the materials available in the record of these appeals and these appeals are hereby disposed of as per the materials available in these appeals.
4. First Appeal No. 363 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 311 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.84 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 399 of Khata No. 3 and a sum of Rs. 495.20 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Rajiv Mandal and others vide order dated 21.11.1999 this appeal stands abated as against respondent No. 7 as on his death his heirs were not substituted and the matter was left open to be decided at the final hearing of the appeal as to whether the entire appeal is abated or not.
5. First Appeal No. 378 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 326 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.25 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 119, 116, 154, 168, 116, 118/1, 115/2, 161/1, 115 and 117 of Khata No. 68 and a sum of Rs. 6889.79 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Siman Manjhi and others.
6. First Appeal No. 390 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 338 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 6.12 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 976, 980, 1064/1, 1004/3 and 1074 of Khata No. 26 and a sum of Rs. 11,187.98 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Sitaram Manjhi and others.
7. First Appeal No. 392 of 1989 arises, out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 340 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.03 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 79/2 and 79/1 of Khata No. 95 and a sum of Rs. 594.60 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Bisan Mahli and others.
8. First Appeal No. 393 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 341 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 7.04 1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1474, 2288/1, 2244, 1693, 1189, 1232/2, 1445, 1469 and 1475 and a sum of Rs. 12,638.27 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Saheb Ghatwar and others.
9. First Appeal No. 398 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 347 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 8.92 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2423 of Khata No. 61 and a sum of Rs. 18,260.63 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Bharatlal Ghatwar and others.
10. First Appeal No. 399 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 348 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.36 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2023/2, 799/3, 799/5, 791, 799/1, 799/4 of Khata No. 70 and a sum of Rs. 3174.80 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Rameshwar Mahto and others. The appeal against co-respondent Nos. 5 and 6 stands dismissed due to the non compliance of order dated 28.6.1999 of this Court and the matter as to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent or not has been left open to be considered at the time of hearing.
11. First Appeal No. 402 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 351 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 16.20 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2613 of Khata No. 117 and a sum of Rs. 8982.74 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Kedar Laya and others.
12. First Appeal No. 403 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 352 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.25 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2421 of Khata No. 119 and a sum of Rs. 1015.74 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Dhaneshwar Layok and others.
13. First Appeal No. 404 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 353 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 5.59 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2455, 2457, 2571 of Khata No. 119 and a sum of Rs. 27,249.89 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Kedar Laya and others.
14. First Appeal No. 405 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 354 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.53 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2093, 2095 of Khata No. 23 and a sum of Rs. 5870.28 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Doman Gosain and others.
15. First Appeal No. 408 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 357 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.39 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1813 and 1875 and a sum of Rs. 7060.56 was determined as compensation and award In respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Bideshi Mahali and another.
16. First Appeal No. 409 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 358 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 2.73 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2187, 2188 and 2239 of Khata No. 22 and a sum of Rs. 8698.89 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Hublal Gosain and others.
17. First Appeal No. 410 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 359 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.05 1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 796/1 and 796/2 of Khata and a sum of Rs. 1498.52 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Doman Gosain and others.
18. First Appeal No. 413 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 362 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 6.12 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 216, 217/2, 218, 220/1, 199/2, 203, 208, 209, 210, 211, 213, 224, 225, 227, 228, 232/1, 232/2, 232/3, 232/4, 234/1, 234/2, 235/2, 237 and 238 and a sum of Rs. 18,136.79 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Kartik Manjhi and another. Respondent Kartik Manjhi has died during the pendency of this appeal and his name has been expunged as respondent.
19. First Appeal No. 415 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 364 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.98 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 712 P and 712 P of Khata No. 72 and a sum of Rs. 498.16 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Doman Gosain and others.
20. First Appeal No. 416 of 1989 arises out -of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 365 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.53 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2689, 2687, 2674 of Khata No. 43 and a sum of Rs. 6094.20 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Amrit Mandal and others. Respondent No. 2 has died and take no steps for substitution of his legal heirs and the question of appeal being incompetent has been left open to be decided at the time of final hearing vide order dated 25.11.1999.
21. First Appeal No. 417 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 366 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.83 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2705, 2707, 2730, 2627 of Khata No. 117 and a sum of Rs. 4921.98 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Kedar Laya and others.
22. First Appeal No. 419 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 368 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 6.41 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2947,951, 952 of Khata No. 125 and a sum of Rs. 3946.52 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Smt. Mandri Devi.
23. First Appeal No. 421 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 370 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.18 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2152 of Khata No. 3 and a sum of Rs. 731.33 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Mandri Devi.
24. First Appeal No. 423 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 372 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.22 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 1156 of Khata No. 66 and a sum of Rs. 893.84 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Niwaran Ch. Das.
25. First Appeal No. 424 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 373 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 3.92 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 680 and 1224 of Khata No. 19 and a sum of Rs. 5095.08 was determined as compensation and award in respecl thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Dhurpa Manjhi and others. Appeal against respondent No. 1 stands dismissed due to the non-compliance of the order dated 24.6.1999 and the matter regarding the competency of the appeal has been left open to be considered at the time of the hearing of this appeal.
26. First Appeal No. 431 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 380 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.17 acres of land appertaining to of Khata No. 95 and a sum of Rs. 690.70 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Chhutu Manjhi.
27. First Appeal No. 434 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 383 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 5.18-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2222, 2251, 2129, 673, 1966P of Khata No. 87 and a sum of Rs. 4,679.55 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Baribol Manjhi and others.
28. First Appeal No. 435 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 384 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 10.04 acres of land appertaining to Khata No. 68 and a sum of Rs. 15,525.94 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Fagu Manjhi and others.
29. First Appeal No. 444 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 393 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 11.97 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 151, 159, 149, 129, 132, 139, 153, 152, 157, 170, 180, 1100, 1203, and 1207 of Khata No. 68 and a sum of Rs. 17091.62 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Hari Manjhi and others.
30. First Appeal No. 445 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 394 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 18.20 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1645 P, 2040, 2223, 2224 and 2225 of Khata No. 55 and a sum of Rs. 37,516.60 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Jagdish Ghatwar and others.
31. First Appeal No. 452 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 401 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 6.74 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2732 of Khata No. 102 and a sum of Rs. 16,836.56 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Shyam Manjhi and others.
32. First Appeal No. 455 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 404 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 8.97 1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1657, 128/1 and 1165 of Khata No. 68 and a sum of Rs. 6883.86 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Chaitan Manjhi and others.
33. First Appeal No. 456 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 405 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.11 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2968 of Khata No. 125 and a sum of Rs. 446.92 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Jalesh-war Manjhi and others.
34. First Appeal No. 458 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 407 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.83 acres of land appertaining to plot No, 1055 of Khata No. 76 and a sum of Rs. 1407.07 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Ram Sunder Manjhi and another.
35. First Appeal No. 462 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 411 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1,12 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1116, 1184, 3009/2, 1136, 3010 and 1115 of Khata No. 1 and a sum of Rs. 3029.75 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Chopa Aghnoo Manjhi.
36. First Appeal No. 471 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 120 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 3.60-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2980 of Khata No. 125 and a sum of Rs. 11,476.37 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Agnu Manjhi and others.
37. First Appeal No. 472 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 421 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 2.50 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 8792 of Khata No. 77 and a sum of Rs. 6109.79 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Haria Manjhi and others.
38. First Appeal No. 479 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 429 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 2.90-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 1244 of Khata No. 118 and a sum of Rs. 8955.54 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Nilmoni Manjhi.
39. First Appeal No. 485 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 1985 in respect of acquisition of 14.56-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 953 of Khata No. 120 and a sum of Rs. 59,204.61 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Charan Manjhi.
40. First Appeal No. 487 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 437 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.53 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2626 of Khata No. 95 of Rs, 777.73 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Haria Manjhi.
41. First Appeal No. 488 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 438 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.45-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2691 of Khata No. 14 and a sum of Rs. 2317.70 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Hussan Manjhi.
42. First Appeal No. 491 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 441 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.19-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1741, 1747, 1740P and 1744 of Khata No. 101 and a sum of Rs. 1361.21 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Batku Manol (Bistu Mandal).
43. First Appeal No. 492 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 442 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.33 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 86 and 87 of Khata No. 78 and a sum of Rs. 4022.70 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Radhu Mahali and another.
44. First Appeal No. 494 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 444 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.27 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 393/1 and 393/2 of Khata No. 42 and a sum of Rs. 670.04 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was 'prepared in favour of respondent Sona Mijhian.
45. First Appeal No. 495 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 445 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.23 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 727P and 1645P of Khata No. 55 and a sum of Rs. 1991.00 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Jagdish Ghatwar.
46. First Appeal No. 496 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 446 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 2.81 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1209, 1939, 539, 48/1 and 548/1 of Khata No. 95 and a sum of Rs. 2092.71 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Mafia Manjhi and others.
47. First Appeal No. 497 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 447 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 4.30 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 860, 863, 866, 861, 537/2 and 541/1 of Khata No. 95 and a sum of Rs. 14,125.00 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Fakir Manjhi and others.
48. First Appeal No. 499 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 499 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 3.10 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 1118 of Khata No. 27 and a sum of Rs. 5899.18 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Bikram Kewat and others.
49. First Appeal No. 503 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No.453 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 13.90 1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 368, 316, 320 and 321 of Khata No. 101 and a sum of Rs. 30524.08 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Phutia Majhian.
50. First Appeal No. 508 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 458 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 2.73 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2689. 2687 and 2674 of Khata No. 5 and a sum of Rs. 5380.36 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Amrit Mandal and others. Respondent No. 2 has died and his heirs were not substituted and the matter as to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent on account of partial abetment has been left open to be decided at the time of hearing of this appeal,
51. First Appeal No. 510 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 460 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.25 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 286 of Khata No. 42 and a sum of Rs. 2392.27 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Lakhan Manjhi.
52. First Appeal No. 518 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 468 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.37-1/2 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 3182 of Khata No. 16 and a sum of Rs. 1561.82 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Bajan Manjhi.
53. First Appeal No. 519 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 469 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.22 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2608 of Khata No. 125 and a sum of Rs. 111.83 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Hakim Manjhi.
54. First Appeal No. 520 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 470 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 3.34 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2577 of Khata No. 14 and a sum of Rs. 11,417.65 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Ludhu Manjhi. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have died and their heirs were not substituted and the matter as to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent on account of partial abetment has been left open to be decided at the time of hearing of this appeal.
55. First Appeal No. 522 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 472 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 2.70 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 221, 220, 1965 and 1966 of Khata No. 87 and a sum of Rs. 4927.69 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Samim Ansary and others.
56. First Appeal No. 523 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 473 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 15.92 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 971 of Khata No. 129 and a sum of Rs. 51,353.73 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Mona Manjhi and others. Respondent No. 2 has died during the pendency of this appeal and his heirs were not substituted and the matter as to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent on account of partial abetment has been left open to be decided at the time of hearing of this appeal.
57. First Appeal No. 525 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 175 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.10-1-/2 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2159 of Khata No. 87 and a sum of Rs. 426.62 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Miajan Ansary.
58. First Appeal No. 526 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 476 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.37 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2745 of Khata No. 119 and a sum of Rs. 696.49 was idetermined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Charan Manjhi.
59. First Appeal No. 527 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 477 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.32 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2549 and 3174 of Khata No. 15 and a sum of Rs. 909.12 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Stta Ram Manjhi and others. Respondents Nos. 1 and 3 have died during the pendency of this appeal and their heirs were not substituted and the matter to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent on account of partial abetment has been open to be decided at the time of hearing of this appeal.
60. First Appeal No. 528 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 478 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 19.73-1/4 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2578 of Khata No. 14 and sum of Rs. 45,324.79 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Husen Manjhi and others. Respondent Nos. 2 and 5 have died during the pendency of this appeal and their heirs were substituted and the matter as to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent on account of partial abetment has been left open to be decided at the time of hearing of this appeal.
61. First Appeal No. 529 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 479 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.27 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 423 of Khata No. 25 and a sum of Rs. 4669.51 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Madan Manjhi and others.
62. First Appeal No. 531 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 481 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.55 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 3912 of Khata No. 68 and a sum of Rs. 379.55 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof wasprepared in favour of respondent Jaleshwar Manjhi.
63. First Appeal No. 532 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 482 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.87 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2546 of Khata No. 15 and a sum of Rs. 1363.90 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Bharat Manjhi and another. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have died during the pendency of this appeal and their heirs were riot substituted and the matter as to whether the whole appeal has become incompetent on account of partial abetment has been left open to be decided at the time of hearing of this appeal.
64. First Appeal No. 535 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 485 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.68 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2497 of Khata No. 16 and a sum of Rs. 346.81 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Kedar Layok.
65. First Appeal No. 536 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 486 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.10 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 860 of Khata No. 94 and a sum of Rs. 761.70 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Moti Manjhi.
66. First Appeal No. 540 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 490 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.21 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2151 and 2159 of Khata No. 87 and a sum of Rs. 853.21 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Hari Ansary and others.
67. First Appeal No. 541 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 491 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.09 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 2530 of Khata No. 104 and a sum of Rs. 365.67 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Narayan Gosain.
68. First Appeal No. 542 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 492 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.40 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 2977 and 2978 of Khata No. 135 and a sum of Rs. 560.88 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Charan Manjhi and others. Respondent Charan Manjhi and respondent Bigan Manjhi have died during the pendency of this appeal and their heirs were substituted.
69. First Appeal No. 543 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 493 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 0.53 acres of land appertaining to plot Nos. 1286 and 1291 of Khata No. 99 and a sum of Rs. 3291.22 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondents Nisan Ansary and others.
70. First Appeal No. 545 of 1989 arises out of Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 495 of 1985 in respect of acquisition of 1.19 acres of land appertaining to plot No. 3228 of Khata No. 47 and a sum of Rs, 1934.78 was determined as compensation and award in respect thereof was prepared in favour of respondent Ram Prasad Manjhi.
71. The respondents had filed their respective petitions under Section 18 of the said Act before the Collector, Dhanbad (now Bokaro) in respect of the awards aforesaid in Land Acquisition Case No. 1/73-74 to make reference to the Land Acquisition Court for determining the proper quantum of compensation payable to them. The Collector referred the matter to the Land Acquisition Court, Dhanbad under Section 19 of the said Act.
72. The case of the respondents in their reference petitions, inter alia, is that the compensation determined by the appellant-State under acquisition is grossly low and inadequate and the Land Acquisition Authorities did not consider the potentialities of the land under acquisition coupled with the fact that the said land is near Bokaro Steel Plant and there are all urbanized facilities such as macadamized road, electricity, piped water, schools, college, hospital and railway station in the vicinity of the said land and a large number of persons after the commissioning of the Bokaro Steel Plant have settled in the vicinity of the acquired land the Land Acquisition Authorities ought to have considered the potentialities of the acquired land irrespective of the classification of the land under acquisition.
73. The case of the appellant-State is that compensation determined of the land under acquisition by the Land Acquisition Authorities is just and proper as per the prevailing market price of the adjoining land and the acquired land is agricultural land of different nature and compensation has been determined as per the sale rate of the adjacaent land obtained from the registration office as per sale report.
74. In view of the oral and documentary evidence on the record the learned Court below came to the finding that the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Authorities appears to be low and inadequate and had determined the compensation of the acquired land @ Rs. 100/-per decimal i.e. Rs. 10,000/- per acre of all categories of the acquired land at the flat rate.
75. Assailing the impugned judgment and the award of the learned Court below it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no rationale or reasonable ground for the learned Court below to determine the compensation of the acquired land at the flat rate of Rs. 10,000/- per acre on the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act. It has further been contended that the acquired land under acquisition is the agricultural land of different classifications and the compensation has been rightly assessed by the Land Acquisition Authorities of the land under acquisition as per the sale rate collected by them from the registration office of the land situate in the vicinity of the acquired land. It has also been contended that the sale rate as per the sale deed dated 23.8.1973 (Ext. II) has been considered by the Land Acquisition Authorities for determining the just and proper compensation of the land under acquisition and the learned Court below has erroneously discarded Ext. II and has committed a manifest error in awarding compensation at the flat rate of Rs. 10,000/-per acre.
76. Refuting the contention aforesaid the learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the Land Acquisition have determined the compensation inadequately and it is very low and the learned Court below ought to have relied upon the sale deeds Ext. 1 and Ext. 1/A for determining the compensation of the land under acquisition and in any case the compensation should not have been determined less than Rs. 17,000/- per acre. It has been submitted that the land under acquisition has vast potentialities surrounding it and the said land is fit for building purposes and in support of their contention reliance has placed on the ratio of the cases of Mani Ram Sharma and etc. v. Union of India AIR 1986 Del 140, The Collector, Raigarh v. Dr. Harisingh Thakur and Anr. AIR 1979 SC 472 and Chimanlal Hargovinddas v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona and Anr. AIR 1988 SC 1652.
77. There is no denying the fact that the appellant-State had acquired the land of the respondents situate in village Panchora, P.S. Marafari, District Dhanbad (now Bokaro) vide Land Acquisition Case No. 1/73-74 for erection of Iron and Steel Plant and its ancillary works and industries etc. and the relevant notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act was published in the gazette on 0/105/1977 and the declaration under Section 6 of the said Act and the possession of the acquired land was taken by the appellant-State on 30.1.1978. There is no dispute in respect of the fact that the entire land under acquisition is of different classification i.e. Paddy I, Paddy II, Paddy III, Tand I, Tand II, Tand III and Parti land as per the sale report prepared by the Land Acquisition Authorities the compensation of Class I paddy land was determined @ Rs. 10,000/- per acre and compensation of the other land under acquisition was proportionately determined and award was prepared in respect thereof in favour of the respondents who received the compensation amount under protest. In the case of The Collector, Raigarh (supra) it has been observed by the Apex Court which runs thus :
'......The question as to whether a land has potentional value as a building site or not is primarily one of fact depending upon several factors such as its condition and situation, the user to which it is put or is. reasonably capable of being put, its suitably for building purposes, its proximity to residential, commercial and industrial area and education, cultural or medical institutions, existing amenities like water, electricity and drainage and the possibility of their future extension, whether the nearby town is a developing or a prospering town with prospects of development schemes and the presence or absence of pressure of building activity towards the land acquired or in the neighbourhood thereof.'
In the case of Mani Ram Sharma and etc. (supra) it has been observed by the Apex Court which runs thus :
'.......In assessing value for purposes of compensation, the essential inquiry must be what is the property worth !n the market, viewed not merely with reference to the uses to which it is at the time applied, but also with reference to the uses to which it may be devoted in future. Potentiality is a true element of value. It includes probabilities, possibilities and prospects. The value of the land in the neighbourhood or adjoining areas is also to be taken into consideration for it may be relevant to a greater or lesser degree,'
It is also relevant here to refer the ratio of the case of Suresh Kumar v. Town Improvement Trust Bhopal, 1978 BLJR (NOC) 21 (SC) in which it has been observed by the Apex Court that 'it is true that the market value of the land acquired has to be correctly determined and paid so that there is neither unjust enrichment on the part of the acquirers nor undue deprivation on the part of the owner. Section 23 of the Act enumerates the matters to be considered in determining compensation. The first to be taken into consideration is the market value of the land on the date of publication of the notification under Section 4(1). The market value is that of a willing vendor and a willing purchaser. A willing vendor would naturally take into consideration such facts as would contribute to the value of his land including its unearned increment. A willing purchaser would also consider more or less the same factors. There may be many ponderable and imponderable factors in such estimation or guess work. Section 24 of the said Act enumerates the matters which the Court shall not take into consideration in determining compensation. Section 25 provides that the amount of compensation awarded by the Court shall not be less than the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11. It is an accepted principle that the land is not to be valued, merely by reference to the use to which it has been put at the time at which its value has to be determined i.e. the date of the notification under Section 4, but also by reference to the use to which it is reasonably capable of being put in the future. A land which is certainly or likely to be used in the immediate or reasonably near future for building purposes but which at the valuation is waste land or has been used for agricultural purposes, the owner, however willing a vendor he is, is not likely to be content to sell the land for its value as waste or agricultural land, as the case may be. The possibility of its being used for building purposes would have to be taken into account. It is well established that the special, though natural, adaptability of the land for the purpose for which it is taken is an important element to be taken into consideration in determining the market value of the land. In such a situation, the land might have already be valued at more than its value as agricultural land if it had any other capabilities. In sum, in estimating the market value of the land or all the capabilities of the land and or all its legitimate purposes to which it may be applied or for which it may be adapted are to be considered and not merely the condition it is in and the use to which it is at the time applied by the owner. The proper principle is to ascertain the market value of the land taken into consideration the special value which ought to be attached to the special advantage possessed by the land, namely, its proximity to developed urbanized areas' In the case of Shambhu Nath and Ors. v. State of Bihar, 1989 PLJR 676 it has been observed that the compensation should be paid taking into consideration various factors including the location, importance, prospect and purpose of land sought to be acquired and the location of the land takes it out from the purview of agricultural land. In the case of Chimanlal Hargovinddas v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona and Anr., AIR 1988 SC 1652, the Apex Court has observed that the market value of land must be determined as on crucial date of publication of notification under Section 4 and has also prescribed general guidelines therein to be applied with understanding informed with common sense.
78. Now on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence on the record coupled with the guidelines referred to the above market value of the land under acquisition prevailing on 1.5.1977 i.e. the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act has to be ascertained for determining the just and adequate compensation payable to the respondents regarding the land under acquisition. It is essential to mention at the very outset that the land under acquisition in this case is situated in village Panchora and the entire land under acquisition is agricultural land of different classification. As per the sale report the Land Acquisition Authorities has determined the value or price of Paddy I land prevailing on the date of the said notification @ Rs. 10,000/- per acre. There is evidence on the record to show that the land was acquired for the construction of Steel Plant and other ancillary industry for Bokaro Steel Plant. The land for Bokaro Steel Plant was acquired in the year 1956 and Bokaro Steel Plant was commissioned in the year 1967-68. The land under acquisition in this case is admittedly situated in the close vicinity of the Bokaro Steel Plant. O.W. 1 had admitted In his evidence that the land under acquisition of village Panchora is 1-1/2 miles from Bokaro Steel Plant via Sector 9 the distance is about 10 miles. The evidence of O.W. 1 regarding the distance via Section 9 has no relevancy in this case. All the witnesses examined on behalf of the respondents have deposed that the land under acquisition has the potentialities of construction of buildings thereon and these lands are surrounded with urban facilities as well as modern amenities such as road, rail, electricity, water, school, college and hospital. There is also evidence on the record to show that a large number of people have settled and constructed their houses in the close vicinity of the land under acquisition prior to 1975. In this view of the matter the land under acquisition has shed its character being primarily an agricultural land. The learned Court below has rightly did not act upon the sale report rate read with Ext. H, the sale deed dated 23.7.1973 which was three years prior to the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act for determining the prevailing market price of the land under acquisition on the relevant date of the said notification. Ext. 1/A is in respect of five decimals of Gora I and land and the date of the sale deed is 26.6.1974 at the rate of Rs. 14,000/- per acre. Ext. 1 is the sale deed dated 25.1.1974 in respect of three decimals of land for Rs. 500/-. Both the sale deeds have also not been rightly acted upon by the learned Court below for the reasons that they were more than three years prior to the notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act. It is equally pertinent to mention here that there is reference of the land covered under Ext. 1/A in the sale report (Ext. C) prepared by the Land Acquisition Authorities but in spite of that the Land Acquisition Authorities did not act upon the rate of sale as per Ext. 1/A only on the ground that it was more than three years prior to the relevant notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act. It appears that the Land Acquisition Authorities have only considered the land under acquisition as agricultural land but they did not consider the potentialities surrounding the said land. The learned Court below as per the evidence on the record has rightly considered the potentialities surrounding the land under acquisition of this case irrespective of its classification and has rightly determined the amount of compensation at the flat rate of Rs. 10,000/- per acre. I see no illegality in the impugned judgment of the learned Court below in view of the ratio of the aforesaid cases. I, therefore, see no force in the submission of the counsel for the appellant.
79. It is equally relevant to mention here that in First Appeal No. 363 of 1989, First Appeal No. 399 of 1989, First Appeal No. 416 of 1989, First Appeal No. 508 of 1989, First Appeal No. 520 of 1989, First Appeal No. 523 of 1989, First Appeal No. 527 of 1989 First Appeal No. 528 of 1989 and First Appeal No. 532 of 1989 some of the respondents have died and their heirs or legal representatives have not been brought on the record. In First Appeal No. 424 of 1989 the appeal was dismissed against some of the respondents due to the lach on the part of the appellant for not complying with the Court's order. A question arose as to whether these appeals have abated or has become incompetent on the aforesaid ground and the matter was left open for hearing at the final stage. Here in the appeals aforesaid the composite award has been prepared jointly in the name of the respondents some of whom have died. No specific share of each of the respondents in the said award has been separately shown. In this view of the matter the award in those cases cannot be split up so far the interest of the deceased respondent is concerned. The other Go-respondents on the record do not at all represent the estate of the deceased respondent. Therefore, due to the non- substitution of the heirs of the deceased respondent or due to the dismissal of the appeal against some of the respondents due to the non-compliance of the Court's order, these appeals have abated as a whole whereas First Appeal No. 424 of 1989 has become incompetent as a whole.
80. Viewed thus there is no merit in these appeals and they fail. The impugned judgment of the learned Court below is hereby affirmed. The appeals are hereby dismissed. There shall be no cost In the facts and circumstances of this case.