Bombay High Court
Prabat Bala Choure vs State Of Maharashtra on 18 April, 2016
Bench: V.K. Jadhav
fa782.02
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 782 OF 2002
Ambadas s/o Bhikurao Choure
Age 60 years, Occ. Agriculture
R/o. Sonegaon, Tq. Patoda
District Beed ...Appellant
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
(Copy to be served on Government
Pleader of the High Court of
Judicature at Bombay,
Bench at Aurangabad) ...Respondents
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 783 OF 2002
Prabat Bala Choure
(Since deceased, through his L.Rs.)
1. Manik s/o Prabhakar @ Prabhat Choure
Age 58 years, Occ. Agriculture
2. Bhagwant s/o Prabhakar @ Prabhat Choure
Age 53 years, Occ. Agriculture
3. Madhukar s/o Prabhakar @ Prabhat Choure
Age 50 years, Occ. Agriculture
All R/o. Sonegaon, Tq. Patoda
District Beed ...Appellants
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
(Copy to be served on Government
Pleader of the High Court of
Judicature at Bombay,
Bench at Aurangabad) ...Respondents
.....
Mr. S.L. Bhapkar, advocate for the appellant
Mr. K.D. Mundhe, AGP for the respondent-State
.....
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:51:21 :::
fa782.02
-2-
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
DATED : 18th APRIL, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT:-
1. Being aggrieved by the common judgment and award dated
22.4.1999, passed by the V Additional District Judge, Beed, in L.A.R.
No. 69 of 1989 and other connected References, the original
claimants in L.A.R. No. 94 of 1989 and 72 of 1989, prefer these two
first appeals.
2 Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeals, are as under:-
The respondent State has acquired the lands of the appellants
for percolation tank at village Belewadi Sonegaon, Tq. Patoda,
District Beed. The lands came to be acquired on 31.5.1985 and the
notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be
issued in Government Gazette on 17.10.1985. The Special Land
Acquisition Officer after making enquiry into the matter, fixed the
market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.100/- per R. Being
aggrieved by the same, the claimants had preferred aforesaid Land
Acquisition References and the learned V Additional District Judge,
Beed by its impugned judgment and award dated 22.4.1999 granted
the compensation at the rate of Rs.300/- per R. The claimants, being
aggrieved by the said judgment and award, preferred these first
fa782.02
appeals.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants-original claimants submits
that the Reference court has considered the previous judgment
(Exh.38) in L.A.R. No.235 of 1989 alongwith connected References
with observation that though the reference petitions arise from
different award but cover the same village Belewadi and the lands
are acquired for the same percolation tank. It appears from the said
judgment in L.A.R. No. 235 of 1989 that the sale instance, as
referred in the References under appeals were relied upon and the
court after considering similar characteristics of the acquired land
and the land comprised in the sale transaction, concluded the market
value of irrigated land, ranging between Rs.500 per R to Rs.1000/-
per R and fixed the value at the rate of Rs.400/- per R. Learned
counsel submits that even though the Reference Court has observed
the same but for no reason reduced the rate of the acquired land of
Rs.300/- per R instead of awarding rate of Rs.400/- per R.
4. Learned A.G.P. submits that so far as the common judgment
delivered in L.A.R. No.235 of 1989 is concerned, the notification
under Section 4 in that case is dated 23.7.1987 and the notification
under section 4 in the present appeals is dated 17.10.1985. The
learned A.G.P. further submits that in the said L.A.R. No. 235 of
fa782.02
1989 two sale instances were considered those are of dated
12.7.1984 and 29.4.1985. Learned A.G.P. submits that considering
the date of notification in L.A.R. No. 235 as 23.7.1987, the
Reference Court has awarded Rs.400/- per R, however, considering
the date of Section 4 notification in the present matter, the Reference
Court has reduced the rate and accordingly awarded compensation
@ Rs.300/- per R. The learned A.G.P. submits that the impugned
judgment and order calls for no interference. There is no substance
in the appeals and the appeals therefore liable to be dismissed.
5. The certified copy delivered in L.A.R. No. 235 of 1989 is
produced before the Reference Court and the same is marked at
Exh.38. On careful perusal of the same, it appears that the
Reference Court, after considering said two sale instances i.e. sale
instance dated 12.7.1984 and sale instance dated 29.4.1985
awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.400/- per R with observation
that the court proposed to fix the market value of the land at Rs.400/-
per R for all the lands.
6. So far as the present appeals are concerned, the Reference
Court has discussed the same in para 18 of the impugned judgment
and award. The Reference Court has observed that on earlier
occasion considering the similar characteristics of the acquired land
fa782.02
and the land comprised in the said sale instance, concluded that the
market value of the irrigated land in the year 1985 ranged between
Rs.500/- per R. to Rs.1000/- per R and accordingly fixed the market
value of Rs.400/- per R for Jirayat land. It also appears from the
judgment delivered in L.A.R. No. 235 of 1989 that the land under
sale instance is at a distance of 3/4 kilometers from the acquired
land. In the backdrop of this position, I do not find any reason as to
why the Reference Court has reduced the compensation amount
from Rs.400/- per R to Rs.300/- per R. The Reference court has
observed in para 18 of the impugned judgment that the market value
of dry land for the relevant year is reduced by 10% than the irrigated
land and thus the market value ought to have been reduced to
Rs.300/- per R. These observations go without any reason.
Considering the market value of the irrigated land in the year 1984-
85, ranging between Rs.500/- to Rs.1000/- per R, the reference court
in L.A.R. No. 235 of 1989 fixed the market value for Jirayat land at
Rs.400/- per R. Admittedly, the State has not preferred any appeal
against the judgment and award in L.A.R. No. 235 of 1989 and the
said award is now attained finality. In view of this, the appellants in
this case also entitled for compensation @ Rs.400/-per R for their
acquired lands. Hence, I pass the following order:-
fa782.02
ORDER
I. Both the first appeals are hereby partly allowed.
II. The impugned judgment and award dated 22.4.1999 to the
extent of L.A.R. No. 94 of 1989 and L.A.R. No. 72 of 1989
is modified in the following manner;-
The claimants are entitled for compensation at the rate of
Rs.400/- per R.
III. The rest of the judgment and award to the extent of L.A.R.
No. 94 of 1989 and L.A. R. No. 72 of 1989 stands
confirmed.
IV. The award be drawn up in tune with the modified award.
V. First appeals are disposed of accordingly.
( V. K. JADHAV, J.)
rlj/
