State Of Mah vs Maharashtra State Farming Corpn ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 81 Bom

                                                                 FA No. 718/15
                                          1




                                                                          
                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
                  APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                  
                            FIRST APPEAL NO. 718 OF 2005
                                        WITH
                         CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8298 OF 2005

     1.       The State of Maharashtra,




                                                 
     2.       Special Land Acquisition Officer,
              No. 15, Ahmednagar.




                                      
     3.       The Superintendent of Police,l
              S.P. Office, Ahmednagar.            ....Appellants.
                              ig                  (Ori. Respondents)

                      Versus
                            
              Maharashtra State Farming Corpn. Ltd.,
              (A Government of Maharashtra
              undertaking), Having its Registered Office
              at Sr. No. 270, Bhamburda, Senapati Bapat
      

              Marg, Pune 411 016.                ....Respondent.
                                                  (Ori. Claimant)
   



     Mr. C.V. Dharurkar, AGP for appellants.





                                       CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.
                                       DATED : 25th February, 2016.

     JUDGMENT :

1) The appeal is filed by the Government against the

Judgment and award of Reference Court of Kopargaon, Civil

Judge, Senior Division given in LAR No. 1/1990. Both the sides

are heard.

FA No. 718/15

2) The land of present respondent, original claimant

from Gat No. 80 situated at Laxmiwadi, village Nimgaon Korhale,

Tahsil Kopargaon, District Ahmednagar was acquired for a

corporation of the State Government. Total area of land Gat No.

80 was 5 Hector 68 R. and portion of 1 Hector 62 R. is acquired

for the purpose of using it for non agricultural purpose.

Notification u/s.4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in

official gazette on 30.4.1987 and the Land Acquisition Officer

prepared the award on 1.8.1988. The possession was taken prior

to the date of award. The Special Land Acquisition Officer gave

the total compensation of Rs. 10,500/- for the area of 1 Hector

34 R. and he gave total compensation of Rs. 200/- for remaining

28 R. portion, which was Potkharab portion. Thus, the rate of

around Rs.78/- was given in respect of 1 Hector 34 R. and the

rate of Rs. 17.14 was given per R. for Potkharab portion. The

claimant had demanded the rate of Rs. 57,555/- per Hector. This

rate is given by the Reference Court on the basis of sale deeds

proved before the Reference Court by the claimant.

3) The sale instance at Exh. 45 shows that 21 R. portion

was sold for the consideration of Rs. 84,000/- in the year 1985

from the same village. Thus, the land was sold at the rate of Rs.

4,000/- per R. The land revenue of land acquired was half of the

FA No. 718/15

land revenue of the land shown in the sale instance. There was

not much difference in other factors. Under sale deed at Exh. 46,

land admeasuring 4 Hectors 97 R. was purchased for the

consideration of Rs. 3.61 lakh by Society Sai Sansthan Temple

Trust in the year 1985. The lands shown in Exhs. 45 to 47 are

adjacent to the acquired land.

4) The land shown in Exh. 45 was irrigated land, having

facility of canal water and this land is considered as comparable

sale instance. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had fixed the

market price on the basis of land revenue and it is already

observed that the land revenue of the land acquired was half of

the land revenue fixed for land shown in Exh. 45. Thus, the value

shown in the sale instance was around Rs. 4,00,000/- per Hector

and even if, it is presumed that the price can be reduced by 50%

in view of the land revenue and it can be reduced by 50% due to

irrigation facility to sale instance land. It can be said that the

rate of Rs. 1,00,000/- per Hector could have been given. In view

of these circumstances, the Reference Court has awarded the

compensation which was claimed by the owner. Compensation

at higher rate could have been easily given. Due to these

circumstances, it is not possible to interfere in the decision of

the Reference Court.

FA No. 718/15

5) In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. Civil

Application stand disposed of.

[ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ]

ssc/