| Headnote |
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 :ss. 4, 6, 17, 18, 23, 24 – Land acquisition – Determination of compensation in light of clauses “thirdly” and “fourthly” of s. 23 concerning ‘severance’ and ‘injurious affection’ respectively – On facts, the appellant-land owner established a township situated at a distance of 36 kms. from the Railway Station – For a direct and rapid connection between the two points, the appellant provided its own trolley line in the year 1946 wherein 35,000 tonnes of heavy material used to get transported – Part of the trolley line got submerged in the backwaters of Ujjani Dam project and the remaining portion of the trolley line situated in the unacquired part of the land had become useless – Land acquisition officer awarded total compensation of Rs.1,27,198.31/- and rejected the claim for the unacquired portion – Reference Court enhanced the compensation for the acquired part of the land and fixed compensation on account of severance and injurious affection – However, the High Court interfered with the award of the Reference Court – On appeal, held: As regards claim relating to rails and sleepers, rolling stock and increase in transportation cost, refusal of the High Court to award any compensation for the injurious affection to one set of movable property, namely, rolling stock cannot be found fault with – Refusal of the High Court to award any compensation for increase in transportation cost, falling under the category of “injurious affection to earnings” also cannot be faulted – However, the refusal of the High Court to grant compensation for the injurious affection sustained by the appellant to one set of movable property, namely, rails and sleepers forming the trolley line for a distance of 28 kms., is unsustainable especially when the grant of compensation for the injurious affection to rails and sleepers to a stretch of 7 kms. submerged in the backwaters, has been sustained by the High Court – In fact, the State has not come up on appeal against the same – Remaining portion of the trolley line to a distance of 28 kms has been rendered useless after the acquisition – Furthermore, clause fourthly of s.23(1), uses a significant phrase “injuriously affecting his other property, movable or immovable, in any other manner, or his earnings” – Thus, injurious affection to property, in any other manner, may stand on a different footing from injurious affection to earnings – While there is no evidence on record to connect the drop in the level of profits from 1975-76 to 1976-77, with the increase in transportation costs, there is acceptable evidence to show that movable property became useless after the acquisition – Thus, the conclusions by the High Court whereby the award of the Reference Court relating to compensation for injurious affection to rails and sleepers, was reversed by the High Court, is set aside – Award of the Reference Court granting a sum of Rs. 31,21,860/- towards compensation for rails and sleepers is restored – As regards, other claims, the impugned judgment not interfered with. |
