Simplified Explanation of the Judgment

The Patna High Court recently delivered its judgment in three connected first appeals concerning land acquisition compensation under the Lower Kiul Valley Scheme. The appeals were filed by a landowner who challenged the compensation awarded by the Sub-Judge, Jamui, in three land acquisition cases: LA Case Nos. 26, 28, and 29 of 1974. These cases pertained to the acquisition of land in the villages of Rajpura and Partappur for the construction of a canal and embankment as part of the Lower Kiul Valley Scheme.

The appellant argued that the compensation provided by the State for the acquired land was grossly undervalued. He received compensation amounts ranging from approximately ₹1,745 to ₹22,236 under protest. He claimed the market rate should have been no less than ₹10,000 per acre, citing the land’s fertility, proximity to the Kiul river, and agricultural productivity (notably paddy and sugarcane).

The Sub-Judge, however, assessed the compensation based on existing settlement records, sale deeds, local surveys, and registration data. He found the average rate to be approximately ₹1260–1380 per acre. The appellant failed to present credible sale deeds or proof of agricultural yield or loss to justify a higher valuation.

Particularly, the appellant submitted two sale deeds (Exhibits 1 and 1/A), but these were dismissed by the trial court on the grounds that:

• The lands sold were far from the acquired plots;
• The sales may have been at inflated prices due to the buyer’s personal interest;
• No reliable khatiyan (land revenue record) or yield data was provided.

The High Court reviewed the Sub-Judge’s judgment and found no legal or factual errors. It upheld the dismissal of two of the three compensation claims and affirmed a minor enhancement in one case (Misc. Case No.28/1974) where the court found a slightly higher valuation justified. In this instance, the court awarded an additional ₹134.30 plus 6% annual interest.

Significance or Implication of the Judgment

This judgment illustrates the high evidentiary threshold required to challenge compensation in land acquisition matters. Landowners must provide credible and contemporaneous documents—like sale deeds, khatiyans, and yield records—to support claims of higher land value. Courts remain cautious in increasing compensation without reliable proof, especially in older acquisition cases. The decision reinforces judicial consistency in land acquisition valuation standards.

Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision

• Issue: Was the compensation awarded for land acquisition under the Lower Kiul Valley Scheme inadequate?
  • Decision:
    • No credible evidence was presented to show the land was undervalued.
    • Only one out of three cases (for 0.915 acres of land in Partappur) justified a minor enhancement of ₹134.30 with 6% interest.
    • The other two appeals were dismissed.

Case Title
Shivendra Sharan Singh vs. The State of Bihar

Case Number
First Appeal Nos. 524, 525, and 526 of 1978

Citation(s)
2020 (1) PLJR 17

Coram and Names of Judges

• Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Priya

Names of Advocates and who they appeared for

• Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate (for the Appellant)
• None appeared for the State

Link to Judgment
https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MSM1MjQjMTk3OCMxI04=-CwjhjqDLjsg=

If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar, you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.