Bombay High Court
Vithalrao S/O Narayanrao Dawande vs State Of Maharashtra on 11 April, 2016
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 fa672.02.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO. 672 OF 2002
The State of Maharashtra,
through Collector, Akola. APPELLANT
...VERSUS...
Vitthalrao Narayanrao Dawande (Dead)
through L.Rs
1] Suresh Vitthalrao Dawande (son)
At. Shivan, PO Bebla, Tq. Karanja,
Distt. Washim.
2] Sunanda Subhash Manjare (Daughter)
At Mugapur, PO Loni, Tq. Karanja,
Distt. Washim.
3] Vanita Rameshwar Mate (Daughter)
At Po Bolgaon, Tq. Murtijapur, Distt. Akola.
4] Nanda Madhukar Aawade (Daughter)
At Jamb, Po Mangrulpeer, Distt. Washim.
5] Mangala Dadarao Nanote (Daughter),
At. Po. Nibhara, Tq. Barshitakli, Distt. Akola.
6] Balasaheb Vitthalrao Dawande (son)
At. Shivan, Po. Bebla, Tq. Karanja,
Distt. Akola ... RESPONDENTS
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION ST. NO. 8068 OF 2003
Vitthalrao Narayanrao Dawande (Dead)
through L.Rs
::: Uploaded on - 18/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:51:45 :::
2 fa672.02.odt
1] Suresh Vitthalrao Dawande (son)
At. Shivan, PO Bebla, Tq. Karanja,
Distt. Washim.
2] Sunanda Subhash Manjare (Daughter)
At Mugapur, PO Loni, Tq. Karanja,
Distt. Washim.
3] Vanita Rameshwar Mate (Daughter)
At Po Bolgaon, Tq. Murtijapur, Distt. Akola.
4] Nanda Madhukar Aawade (Daughter)
At Jamb, Po Mangrulpeer, Distt. Washim.
5]
Mangala Dadarao Nanote (Daughter),
At. Po. Nibhara, Tq. Barshitakli, Distt. Akola.
6] Balasaheb Vitthalrao Dawande (son)
At. Shivan, Po. Bebla, Tq. Karanja,
Distt. Akola, OBJECTOR
...VERSUS...
The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Akola RESPONDENT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri A.M.Deshpande, AGP for appellant in FA No. 672 of 2002 and for
Respondent in Cross Objection St.No. 8068 of 2003
Shri R.G.Kavimandan, Advocate h/f Shri R.L.Khapre, Advocate for
Respondents in FA No. 672 of 2002 and for objector in Cross Objection
St.No. 8068 of 2003
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, J.
th
DATE : 11 APRIL, 2016 .
ORAL JUDGMENT
1] In Land Acquisition Case No. 163 of 1996 filed
under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the Reference
3 fa672.02.odt
Court has enhanced the compensation for acquisition of 14
acres irrigated land in Survey No. 21 (Gat No. 43) to
Rs.18,000/- per acres (Rs. 45,000/- per hectare). The
Reference Court has enhanced the compensation to
Rs.10,000/- per acres (Rs.25,000/- per hectare) for dry crop
land. In addition to it, the Reference Court also granted
compensation at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per tree for 849 lemon
trees and at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per tree for 166 orange
trees. For 4 mango trees, the compensation awarded was at
the rate of Rs.5,000/- and for 1 coconut tree, Rs.2000/-, for 1
Awala tree Rs.1000/- and for each bamboo bunch at the rate
of Rs.1000/-. In addition to that, Rs. 50/- each for 78 Nilgiri
trees.
2] The points for determination are as under;
[I] Whether the Reference Court has committed an
error in enhancing the compensation for
acquisition of land and grant of compensation for
the trees in question?
[II] Whether the claimants are entitled to further
enhancement of compensation?
4 fa672.02.odt
3] In First Appeal No. 493 of 2002 and 512 of 2004,
decided by common judgment dated 27.08.2010, this Court
has dismissed the appeal preferred by the State Government
arising out of notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act issued on 18.12.1980 and the award passed
by the Land Acquisition Officer therein. The Reference Court
had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per
hectare for dry crop land by its judgment and order dated
26.02.1999. The present appeal arises out of the acquisition
made under the said notification dated 18.12.1980 for the
same project of construction of dam at village Shivan (Khd.).
The Land Acquisition Officer had also awarded in the present
case the same compensation of Rs.10,000/- per hectare.
This Court has maintained the compensation at the rate of
Rs.25,000/- per hectare for dry crop land. In view of this, no
different view can be taken in the present matter in respect of
the enhancement of compensation at the rate of Rs.25,000/-
per hectare. Similarly, for the irrigated land, the rate of
Rs.45,000/- per hectare also cannot be said to be exorbitant.
The existence of trees is not in dispute and in the memo of
appeal, there is no challenge to the compensation for the
trees. The findings are based upon the evidence and there is
5 fa672.02.odt
no reason to take a different view of the matter than one
which is taken by this Court by common judgment and order
dated 27.08.2010 delivered in the aforestated appeals. The
appeal preferred by the State Government is, therefore, liable
to be dismissed.
4] So far as the claim for enhancement of
compensation is concerned, the same also cannot be
substantiated in view of the fact that the rate of Rs.25,000/-
per hectare has already been confirmed by this Court. The
cross objection is, therefore, required to be rejected.
5] In the result, the following order is passed.
First Appeal No. 672 of 2002 is dismissed. The
Cross Objection St.No. 8068 of 2003 is also dismissed. No
order as to cost.
JUDGE
Rvjalit
