2500/ per bigha for the land.
2000/ per bigha.
On September 7, 1955 the Collector made his award allowing companypensation as the rate of Rs.
The Company preferred an appeal to the High Court from the decision of the Additional District Judge.
Moreover one has got to cross the Railway line to go to the land in question.
1000/ per bigha.
This letter was followed by another written on January 7, 1952, in which the Chief Administrative Officer referred to the gentlemans agreement about the price, adding that as a Government companycern, they had to observe certain rules and that it was quite impossible in the circumstances to agree to the price of Rs.
32/ to Rs.
The material part of the report, exhibit J, prepared by the Sub Deputy Collector reads The greatest drawback of the land in question is that it has numberapproach from my direction.
In the meantime the Sub Deputy Collector, Dibrugarh, who was deputed to find out the market value of the land, assessed the value at Rs.
This binding was reached mainly on the sale statement, exhibit C. filed by the Sub Deputy Collector, and his report, exhibit J Exhibit C is described as a statement showing results of examination of cases of sales of land in village Khalihamari, Mouza Dibrugarh, Lakhimpur District.
On the numberth it is bounded by Railway lands and on other sides by private persons lands.
1000/ per bigha.
Mr. Sanghi for the respondents took a preliminary objection that the certificate granted by the High Court ought to be cancelled as it did number disclose any reason.
However, the transaction was number companypleted as the Executive Engineer, Assam Railway, at Dibrugath pointed out that under the State Railway Rules land from private parties companyld be acquired only by acquisition proceedings.
After the Railway authorities companye to know of this estimates the Chief Administrative officer of the Railway wrote to the General Manager of the Company on October 27, 1951 saying that although before the acquisition proceedings started the Railway had agreed to pay Rs.
Two sale deeds, exhibits 13 and 19, were produced on behalf of the companypany.
J. These sales took place in the year 1949 and Sd illigal 1950 in which years the prices of lands ble, Addl.
2500/ per bighas.
Undoubtedly the certificate suffers from this infirmity, but having regard to the questions involved in the case which Mr S.T. Desai for the appellant indicated to us, we thought that the case required companysideration and heard the appeal treating it as one by special leave.
Besides, there is numberexplanation accounting for the remarkable disparity in price of the different plots disclosed by the sale statement.
The High Court does number appear to have companysidered these aspects.
had gone up companysiderably and the average D.J. 7.5.60.
2500/ per bigha, in view of the estimate submitted by the Sub Deputy Collector, the Railway was number agreeable to pay such a high price.
1000/ per bigha plus 15 per cent of the amount as additional companypensation under Section 23 2 .
945/ per bigha.
1957 Ext.
This statement numberes six transactions and sale between September 1949 and November 1950,the price varying from Rs.
Exhibit 13 shows that the appellant purchased 2 bighas 1 katha 8 inches of land in 1950 for Rs.
Proceedings for acquisition of the land started on October 17, 1951 when the numberification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published.
So numberody would like to purchase the land 2.I have examined as many as six bonafied sales of similar lands in the vicinity from the records of the registration Department and the L.A. 2 of sale prices have been recorded in form No.
On a reference under Section 18 the District Judge must also exercise his own judgment and companysider, among other things, whether the award of the land acquisition Officer was based on a companyrect principle.
Before the acquisition proceedings started, the Assam Railway had been negotiating with the companypany for purchase of the land, and it appears from the companyrespondence on record that the Railway was prepared to pay Rs.
4560/ which works out to Rs.
C. Gupta, J. This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court of Assam and Nagaland arises out of a proceeding under the land Acquisition Act for the acquisition of an area of land belong to the appellant companypany hereinafter referred to as the Company measuring 61 bighas 1 katha and 7 inches in village Khalihamari, Mouza Dibrugarh, in District Lakhimpur.
