Bombay High Court
Jijabai W/O Laxman Jadhao vs State Of Maharashtra Thr ... on 13 April, 2016
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
1 fa.1133.11.jud
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.1133 OF 2011
Appellant : Jijabai w/o Laxman Jadhao,
Aged about 65 yrs. Occu. Agriculturist,
R/o Antri Deshmukh,
Tah. Mehkar, Distt. Buldana.
ig -- Versus --
Respondents : 1] State of Maharashtra,
through Collector, Buldhana.
2] Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation,
Division No.2, Chikhali, Distt. Buldhana.
with
FIRST APPEAL NO.15 OF 2012
Appellant : Shriram Raibhan Morey,
Aged about 57 yrs. Occu. Agriculturist,
R/o Antri Deshmukh,
Tah. Mehkar, Distt. Buldana.
-- Versus --
Respondents : 1] State of Maharashtra,
through Collector, Buldhana.
2] Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation,
Division No.2, Chikhali, Distt. Buldhana.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Shri Tushar Darda, Advocate for the Appellant.
Ms. N.P. Mehta, A.G.P. for the Respondents.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
C ORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.
DATE : APRIL 13, 2016.
2 fa.1133.11.jud
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
By order dated 18/11/2013, First Appeal No.15/2012 was
directed to be heard along with First Appeal No.1133/2011. Since both
these appeals arise out of common judgment dated 25/07/2011 in L.A.C.
Nos.137/2000 and 139/2000, they are being decided by this common
judgment.
02] In the First Appeal No.1133/2011, field survey No.489,
admeasuring about 1 hectare 43 ares situated at Mouza Antri Deshmukh
was the subject matter of acquisition in the proceedings under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the said Act). The notification under
Section 4 of the said Act was issued on 01/01/1998 and the Land
Acquisition Officer passed his award on 26/11/1999. He awarded a sum of
Rs.48,000/- per hectare. In First Appeal No.15/2012, field survey No.489
also admeasuring 1 hectare 43 ares was the subject matter of acquisition
under the same notification. Rs.48,000/- per hectare was granted by the
Land Acquisition Officer as compensation. The claimants preferred
reference under Section 18 of the said Act seeking enhancement in the
amount of compensation. The Reference Court enhanced the
compensation to Rs.1,50,000/- per hectare. Not being satisfied by said
enhancement, the claimants have filed these two appeals.
3 fa.1133.11.jud
03] Shri Tushar Darda, the learned counsel for the appellants
submitted that the Reference Court ought to have taken into consideration
the sale instance dated 20/05/1997 (Exh.18). By said sale-deed, land
admeasuring 1 hectare 0.01 are from Survey No.38/3 situated at Bori,
Tahsil Mehkar, District Buldhana was sold for consideration of
Rs.2,32,500/-. He submitted that as the sale instance was prior to the
issuance of Section 4 notification, the value of the land therein ought to
have been considered as market value for the acquired land. He submitted
that though the Reference Court considered the said sale instance, it
enhanced the compensation only to the extent of Rs.1,50,000/- per hectare.
He, therefore, submitted that the appellants were entitled for higher
compensation.
04] Ms. N.P. Mehta, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for
the respondents supported the impugned judgment. According to her, the
amount of Rs.1,50,000/- that was granted as compensation for 1 hectare
land was the proper market value of the acquired land. It was submitted
that considering the fact that the sale instance pertains to an adjoining
village and there was no sale instance from village Antri Deshmukh placed
on record, there was no reason to enhance the amount of compensation. It
was, therefore, submitted that in absence of any other evidence on record,
4 fa.1133.11.jud
the amount of compensation granted by the Reference Court does not
deserve to be enhanced.
05] With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, I
have perused the records of the case. I have also gone through the
impugned judgments. The following point arises for consideration :
Whether a case has been made out for enhancing the amount of
compensation?
06] The appellants in support of the prayer for enhancement filed
their respective affidavits. The appellant in First Appeal No.15/2012 filed
his affidavit at Exh.15. He stated therein that he was claiming an amount
of Rs.1,50,000/- per hectare as compensation. He placed on record the sale
instance dated 20/05/1997 at Exh.18 on record. Besides the said sale
instance, there is no other sale instance placed on record. No evidence was
laid by the Land Acquisition Officer.
07] The Reference Court while considering said sale instance
found that village Bori was adjacent to the village from where the land was
acquired. Considering the date of the sale instance, the Reference Court
5 fa.1133.11.jud
found it fit to grant a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- per hectare. Considering the
fact that this was the amount claimed by the appellants before the
Reference Court and that there was no other evidence on record to further
enhance the amount of compensation, it cannot be said that the
enhancement granted by the Reference Court is on a lower side.
Considering the entire evidence on record, I find that the amount of
Rs.1,50,000/- per hectare that has been granted by the Reference Court is
fair and reasonable compensation for the acquired land. The point as
framed is answered by holding that there is no reason to further enhance
the amount of compensation as awarded by the Reference Court.
08] In view of aforesaid, the following order is passed :
(I) The judgment of the Reference Court dated 25/07/2011 in
L.A.C. Nos.137/2000 and 139/2000 is confirmed.
(II) The appeals are dismissed but with no order as to costs.
JUDGE
*sdw
