On the basis of the applications Ext.
The Collector awarded companypensation at the rate of Rs.
The extent of the land acquired in the case of the first respondent in Civil Appeal No.
350/ per bighas for rupit land and Rs.
24/ per year.
A, the Subordinate Judge declined to accept the oral evidence adduced on behalf of the claimants to prove that the yield was 10 to 12 maunds per bigha.
There is numberhing on record to suggest that the amount of the yield appearing from the rent receipts was incorrect.
A made to the Collector by one of claimants, Surendra Nath Sarma, which included a statement that the rupit land yielded 6 to 8 maunds of paddy per bighas per year.
Calculating on this basis the High Court fixed the amount of companypensation for the rupit lands at Rs.
In arriving at this figure he declined to place any reliance on Ext.
1 series which showed that claimant Surendra Nath Sarma used to get 2 2 73 maunds of paddy for one bigha of land.
In view of the statement in the application Ext.
The capitalized value of the land on the basis of 25 years income worked out at Rs.
A and the rent receipts Ext.
300/ per bighas for basti land.
As regards the price, the High Court accepted the rate adopted by the Subordinate Judge based on the Gcvernment numberification which was Rs.
178 of 1968, Raj Chandra Sarma was 11 bighas, 4 kathas and 10 lachhes of ruipt cultivable land, and in the case of Surendra Nath Sarma, sole respondent in Civil Appeal No.
As regards the basti lands the Subordinate Judge found numbermaterial to induce him to arrive at a figure differs from that awarded by the Collector namely Rs.
The rent receipts disclosed that Surendra Nath Sarma had let out some of these lands on Chukani basis for 8 puras of paddy per bigha year, 3 pures being equivalent to one maund.
He referred to an application Ext.
H was a report on the outturn of rice and number paddy and that it disclosed that estimates of the yield of clean rice from paddy was based on the official companyversion figures of 62.5 per cent.
Counsel for the claimants pointed out that Ext.
300/ per bigha per year.
8/ per maunds thus the net income from 1 bigha of rupit land was fixed at Rs.
H which is a report of the Statistical Department of the Government of Assam on outturn of Winter Rice in Assam for 1950 51.
179 of 1968, 67 bighas 1 katha nnd 10 lachhes of which 60 bighas were rupit land, and 7 bighas 1 kathas and 16 lachhas were basti land.
The finding of the High Court is based on the report, Ext.
Proceeding on the basis that the average yield per bighas per year was 7 maunds of paddy, and deducting half of this amount on account of companyt of cultivation and other incidential expenses, the net yield from one bigha of rupit land came to about 3 1/2 maunds per year.
Being dissatisfied the claimants applied for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
1 series the Subordinate Judge held the average net yield per year from 1 bigha of rupit land was 3 maunds, and on the basis of the Government numberification of the year in question fixed the price of paddy at Rs.
The Subordinate Judge also referred to the rent receipts Ext.
8/ per maund.
600/ and the Subordinate Judge allowed companypensation at the aforesaid rate for the rupit lands.
1,000/ per bigha.
H, and the evidence of the claimants who said that the rupit lands yielded, 10 to 12 maunds of paddy per bigha per year.
But even calculating on the basis of the official companyversion rate, the yield of paddy per bigha would be numberhere near 8 maun is which was found by the High Court.
As this report was prepared on sample survey basis the Subordinate Judge felt it was number a reliable guide for assessing the value of the acquired land.
The Subordinate Judge who heard the reference felt that on the material before him the only possible way to assess the value of the land was by capitalizing the income from the land for 25 years.
A large area of land in village Gotanagar, Mouza Ramcharani was acquired for the Railways in 1950.
C. Gupta, J. These two appeals on certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Assam and Nagaland under Article 133 1 c of the Constitution arise out of land acquisition proceedings.
