Shri Mahomed Alli Abdul Kareem ... vs The Special Land Acquisition ...
2005 Latest Caselaw 62 Bom

JUDGMENT

D.G. Deshpande, J.

1. This is a common judgment in respect of the aforesaid eight appeals. Out of which four appeals have been filed by the claimants for further enhancement of compensation and other four appeals have been filed the State challenging the enhancement granted by the lower Court. All the claimants in all the four appeals and in the cross objections filed by the State are common. Common argument was advanced by the advocates, though they have pointed out peculiar facts of particular case. Therefore, this common judgment.

2. The Appeals filed by the claimants are being Appeal Nos. 695/92; 692/92; 679/92 and 6/93. And the remaining appeals being Appeal Nos. 200/93; 789/94; 217/93 and 21/93; have been filed by the State.

3. Appeal No. 695/92 is arising out of a Reference bearing LAR No. 18 of 1987; Appeal No. 692/92 is arising out of a Reference bearing LAR No. 397 of 86; Appeal No. 679/92 is arising out of a Reference bearing LAR No. 17 of 1987 and Appeal No. 6/93 is arising out of a Reference bearing LAR No. 405 of 1986. The date of the notification is 4th February 1970.

The land acquired in LAR No. 18 of 1987 is from S. No. 24 H. No. 1 admeasuring 4200 sq.mtrs. situated at village Taloja Panchnand. The compensation awarded by the SLAO was Rs. 2/- per sq.mtr. and the claimants are claiming Rs. 20/- per sq.mtr. and the claimants are claiming Rs. 20/- per sq.mtr. The lower Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq.mtrs.

The land acquired in LAR No. 397 of 1986 is from S.Nos. 24 H. No. 3, 93 H. No. 1, 93 H. No. 2, 22430 sq. mtrs. situated at village Taloja Panchnand. The compensation awarded by the SLAO was Rs. 2 or Rs. 3 per sq. mtr. and the claimants are claiming Rs. 20/- per sq.mtr. The lower Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq.mtrs.

The land acquired in LAR No. 17 of 1987 is from S.Nos. 74/5 H. No. 0-27-8 and S. No. 93/4 H. No. 0-24-0 admeasuring 24 R i.e. 5190 sq.Mtrs. situated at village Taloja Panchnand. The compensation awarded by the SLAO was Rs. 2/- or Rs. 3/- per sq.mtr. and the claimants are claiming Rs. 20/- per sq.mtr. The lower Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq.mtrs.

The land acquired in LAR No. 405 is from S. No. 64 H. Nos. 1 and 2 admeasuring 16875 sq.mtrs. (but the actual area acquired is 17070 sq.mtrs.) situated at village Owe Taluka Panvel District Raigad. The compensation awarded by the SLAO was Rs. 5000/- per acre and the claimants are claiming Rs. 20/- per sq.mtr. The lower Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq.mtrs.

4. In all the appeals filed by the claimants they have claimed that they were entitled to Rs. 20 per sq.mtrs. (by filing civil application Rs. 20/- to Rs. 30/- per sq.mtr. have ben claimed by the claimants). Whereas in the Cross Objections filed by the State it is contended that the enhancement of compensation at Rs. 17/- per sq.mtr. in first three appeals and Rs. 15/- per sq.mtr. in last appeal was not at all justified and it should have been on lower scale.

5. Mr. Maniyar, the counsel appearing of the claimants, at the out set, relied upon judgment of the Division Bench in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 dated 16th March 2000. In that case common judgment was given by the Division Bench in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 and 30 other First Appeals with 4 Cross Objections. Para 9 of the judgment is in respect of appeals arising out of acquisition from Village Taloja Panchnand. The criteria that was applied by the Division Bench for enhancing the compensation in those appeals and, particularly in the appeals arising out of acquisition from village Taloja Panchnand was the proximity of lands from Highway. The Division Bench applied same standard or test i.e. proximity of acquired lands from Highway in the appeals arising out of acquisition from village Owe. The Division Bench awarded different rates raging from Rs. 20 to Rs. 17/- per sq.mtr.

Mr. Maniyar therefore contended that there is no substance in the appeals filed by the State and there is no case of reduction of the compensation granted.

6. In order to find out whether the lands acquired under the four References, i.e. LAR Nos. 18/87; 397/86; 17/87 and 405/86 in the present matters, are closer to the Highway or away from the High way, evidence of Jeevan Kulkarni examined by the claimants as expert will have to be considered.

In LAR No. 18/87 [Appeal No. 695/92] Jeevan Kulkarni, as the witness No. 1 for the claimant, has filed his report at Exhibit 23. In his evidence Jeevan Kulkarni has stated that the land in question is fronting on Taloja Owe road which connects Bombay Poona Highway at a short distance. He has not given actual distance of the land in question from the highway.

In LAR No. 397/86 [Appeal No. 692/92] Jeevan Kulkarni, as the witness No. 1 for the claimant, has filed his report at Exhibit 24. In his evidence Jeevan Kulkarni has stated that the land in question is fronting on Taloja Owe road which connects Bombay Poona Highway at a short distance. He has not given actual distance of the land in question from the highway.

In LAR No. 17/87 [Appeal No. 679/92] Jeevan Kulkarni, as the witness No. 1 for the claimant, has filed his report at Exhibit 25. In his evidence Jeevan Kulkarni has stated that the land in question is fronting on Taloja Owe road which connects Bombay Poona Highway at a short distance. He has not given actual distance of the land in question from the highway.

In LAR No. 405/86 [Appeal No. 6/93] Jeevan Kulkarni, as the witness No. 2 for the claimant, has filed his report at Exhibit 26 and plan at Exhibit 25. The land acquired in this appeal is from village Owe. Jeevan Kulkarni has stated that this land is situated in the revenue village Owe which is bounded by village Taloja to the East South Kharghar and West hill ranges by furcating Thana and Raigad districts. To the North of village Owe, village Rohinjan is situated which is out side the acquisition of New Bombay. Bombay Poona National Highway No. 4, Divan Panvel Apta Rly passes through the village Taloja his evidence Jeevan Kulkarni has stated that the land in question is fronting on Taloja Owe road which connects Bombay Poona Highway at a short distance. He has not given actual distance of the land in question from the highway.

7. In LAR No. 18/87 Expert Jeevan Kulkarni has filed a map on record at Exhibit 22 and his report Exhibit 23. It is in respect of land under acquisition from village Taloja Panchnand, Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad owned by Shri Mahamad Alli Abdul Karim Arshi & ors. In that report amongst other things he has given land marks and their distances from the land in question as under:-

  1. Railway Station Taloja                     960 Mtrs.
2. MIDC Industrial Area                       2080 Mtrs.
3. Jawahar Industrial Area Kamothe            4800 Mtrs
4. Bombay Pune National Highway               1320 Mtrs
5. Sion Panvel Highway                        4800 Mtrs
6. Panvel City                                9000 Mtrs
7. Taloja Gaothan                             80 Ms S.E
 

In LAR No. 397/86 Expert Jeevan Kulkarni has filed a map on record at Exhibit 23 and his report Exhibit 24. It is in respect of land under acquisition from village Taloja Panchnand, Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad owned by Shri Mahamad Alli Abdul Karim Arshi & Ors. In that report amongst other things he has given land marks and their distances from the land in question as under:-

  1. Railway Station Taloja                    960 Mtrs.
2. MIDC Industrial Area                      2080 Mtrs
3. Jawahar Industrial Area Kamothe           4800 Mtrs
4. Bombay Pune National Highway               320 Mtrs
5. Sion Panvel Highway                       4800 Mtrs
6. Panvel City                               9000 Mtrs
7. Taloja Gaothan                            80 Ms S.E
 

In LAR No. 17/87 Expert Jeevan Kulkarni has filed a map on record at Exhibit 24 and his report Exhibit 25. It is in respect of land under acquisition from village Taloja Panchnand, Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad owned by Shri Mahamad Alli Abdul Kari Arshi & ors. In that report amongst other things he has given land marks and their distances from the land in question as under:-

  1. Railway Station Taloja                    1600 Mtrs
2. MIDC Industrial Area                      2080 Mtrs
3. Jawahar Industrial Area Kamothe           4800 Mtrs
4. Bombay Pune National Highway              1280 Mtrs
5. Sion Panvel Highway                       4800 Mtrs
6. Panvel City                               9000 Mtrs
7. Taloja Gaothan                            320 Ms &
                                             40 Ms S.E
 

In LAR No. 405/86 Expert Jeevan Kulkarni has filed a map on record at Exhibit 25 and his report Exhibit 26. It is in respect of land under acquisition from village Owe Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad owned by Shri Mahamad Alli Abdul Karim Arshi and Ors. In that report amongst other things he has given land marks and their distances from the land in question as under:-

  1. Railway Station Taloja                    1280 Mtrs
2. MIDC Industrial Area                      3200 Mtrs
3. Jawahar Industrial Area Kamothe           5760 Mtrs
4. Bombay Pune National Highway              1120 Mtrs
5. Sion Panvel Highway                       5760 Mtrs
6. Panvel City                               9000 Mtrs
7. Taloja Gaothan                            960 Ms SW
 

8. The advocate for the claimants relied upon the common judgment in the group of Appeals i.e. First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 decided by the Division Bench of our High Court. The Division Bench,in the aforesaid group of appeals, particularly the appeals arising out of acquisition from village Taloja Panchnand, has applied one criteria i.e. proximity of acquired land from the National highway. Same criteria is applied to the land acquired from village Owe. Therefore, in the instant matters also said criteria will have to be applied. In respect of the acquired lands from village Taloja Panchnand, the difference of distances of the acquired lands from the national Highway have been given by the expert Jeevan Kulkarni. If the acquired lands are comparatively closer to the National Highway Rs. 20/- per sq. mtr. have been granted by the Division Bench and if the lands are away then Rs. 17/- have been granted.

So far as lands involved in Appeal Nos. 2000 of 1993 and 217 of 1993 filed by the State are concerned, the acquired lands are away from the National Highway. Therefore, Rs. 15/- per sq.mtr would be proper compensation.

So far as land involved in Appeal No. 695 of 1992 filed by the claimant is concerned, it is at a distance of 320 mtrs. from the National Highway. Therefore, Rs. 25/- per sq.mtr would be proper compensation.

So far as land acquired from village Owe is concerned, it is far away from the National Highway as per the distance given by expert Jeevan Kulkarni. Therefore, Rs. 13/- would be proper compensation.

9. The learned Government Pleader contended that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court [Kasturi and Ors. v. State of Haryana) development charges are required to be deducted from the amount of compensation and in that case the Supreme Court deducted 20% instead of normal 1/3rd. The Division Bench in the group of appeals, referred to above, has also taken that aspect into consideration and awarded 10% on account of development charges. However, looking to the distances of the lands in this case 15% development charges would be proper. Therefore, I pass the following order:-

:ORDER:

ORDER IN APPEAL NO. 695/92 AND APPEAL NO. 200/93 [LAR NO. 18/87]

The Appeal filed by the State i.e First Appeal No. 200 of 1993 is partly allowed. Compensation granted to the Respondents is reduced to Rs. 15/- per sq.mtr. and the State will be entitled to development charges at 15% from the amount of compensation.

The Appeal filed by the claimants i.e. First Appeal No. 695 of 1992 and the Civil Application filed by the claimants for enhancement are dismissed.

ORDER IN APPEAL NO. 692/92 AND APPEAL NO. 789/94 [LAR NO. 397/86]

The Appeal filed by the claimants i.e. Appeal No. 692 of 1992 is partly allowed. The compensation awarded to the claimants for the acquired land is increased to Rs. 25/- per sq.mtr. The Civil Application filed by the claimants for enhancement does not survived in view of this order.

The Appeal filed by the State i.e. First Appeal No. 789 of 1994 is partly allowed. The State will be entitled to development charges at 15% from the amount of compensation.

ORDER IN APPEAL NO. 679/92 AND APPEAL NO. 217/93 [LAR NO. 17/87]

The Appeal filed by the State i.e. First Appeal No. 217 of 1993 is partly allowed. Compensation granted to the Respondents is reduced to Rs. 15/- per sq.mtr. and the State will be entitled to development charges at 15% from the amount of compensation.

The Appeal filed by the claimants i.e. First Appeal No. 679 of 1992 and the Civil Application field by the claimants for enhancement are dismissed.

ORDER IN APPEAL NO. 6/93 AND APPEAL NO. 21/93 [LAR NO. 405/86]

The Appeal filed by the State i.e First Appeal No. 21 of 1993 is partly allowed. Compensation granted to the Respondents is reduced to Rs. 13/- per sq.mtr. and the State will be entitled to development charges at 15% from the amount of compensation.

The Appeal filed by the claimants i.e. First Appeal No. 6 of 1993 and the Civil Application filed by the claimants for enhancement are dismissed.

There will be no order as to costs either in the appeals of the State or of the claimants.