V.I.D.C. Thr. Exe Engineer vs Mukinda S/O Bablaji Bagade And 2 ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 3888 Bom

                                                  1

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                            NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                                    
                                                            
    First Appeal No. 133 of 2011

                    with




                                                           
    Cross-Objection (St) No. 11717 of 2016



    Appellant       :       Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, 




                                                 
                            through its Executive Engineer, Bembla Project
                                 
                            Division, Yavatmal

                            versus
                                
    Respondents :           1) Mukinda son of Bablaji Bagade, aged about 

                            65 years, Occ: Cultivator, resident of Malapur, Tahsil
      


                            Babhulgaon, District Yavatmal
   



                            2) The State of Maharashtra, through the Collector,

                            Yavatmal





                            3) The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation

                            Work No. 1 Division Yavatmal





    Shri A. B. Patil, Advocate for appellant 

    Shri B. D. Vora,  Advocate for respondent no. 1/Cross-objector

    Shri M. A. Kadu, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents no. 2 & 3

                                       --------

Coram : Prasanna B. Varale, J

Dated : 18th July 2016

Oral Judgment

1. The appeal has already been admitted on 14.11.2011 and Cross-objection

has been admitted on 8th July 2016.

2. The appeal challenges enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs. 270/-

per square meter for plotable area and Rs. 2,690/- per square meter for

construction area by the Reference Court. According to the appellant, the

compensation of Rs. 70/- per square meter for open plot and Rs. 1823/- per

square meter for construction was properly granted by the land Acquisition

Officer. By cross-objection, the respondent-claimant has claimed compensation

of Rs. 500/- per square meter for open plot, on the basis of judgment of this

Court passed in First Appeal No. 931 of 2007 on 17th February 2016.

3. In First Appeal No. 931 of 2007, two judgments delivered by the

Reference Court in LAC No. 405 of 2005 and LAC No. 330 of 2005 were brought

to the notice of this Court wherein the Reference enhanced the compensation at

Rs. 500/- per square meter for the open plot and Rs. 995/- per square meter for

the constructed area. In the case before the Court (FA No. 931 of 2007), the

Reference Court had granted enhancement for the open plot @ Rs. 200/- per

square meter which was much lesser and for the constructed area the rate

granted was Rs. 1290/- per square meter which was higher than the rate

granted in LAC No. 405 of 2005 and LAC No. 330 of 2005 which was upto 30%

of the rate granted by the Land Acquisition Officer. However, this Court found

that no appeal was filed by the appellant in those two land acquisition cases

and, therefore, this Court dismissed First Appeal No. 931 of 2007. In the

present case, the rate granted by the Land Acquisition Officer for constructed

area is Rs. 1823/- per square meter, which has been enhanced by the Reference

Court to Rs. 2690/- per square meter, which is more than 45% of the rate

granted by the Land Acquisition Officer. Shri Patil submitted that if the appeal

and the X-Objection are to be decided on the basis of judgment in First Appeal

No. 931 of 2007, then similar rate will have to be granted for open plot and

construction in the present case. Therefore, in present matter, the rate which

can be granted to the claimant-respondent no. 1 is Rs. 500/- per square meter

for open plot and Rs. 2370/- per square meter (i.e. 30% of Rs. 1823/- per

square meter) for construction. The counsel for claimant-respondent no. 1

agrees to the same.

4. It is not in dispute that the notification under Section 4 in the present

case is the same notification by which the lands involved in the aforesaid two

cases were acquired. The award passed is also similar and other factors like

location of land and the quality are also same. Hence, following the above

judgment in First Appeal No. 931 of 2007 of this Court, present appeal and

cross-objection will have to be partly allowed. The challenge by the appellant for

the rate awarded for the open area fails whereas the appellant Corporation

succeeds on the point of compensation awarded for the constructed area. The

respondent-claimant would be entitled for compensation @ Rs.2370/- per

square meter for constructed area.

5. As far as cross-objection is concerned, the same is partly allowed. Cross-

objector would be entitled to compensation of Rs. 500/- per square meter for

open plot, the rate which is already accepted by the Corporation in LAC No. 405

of 2005 and LAC No. 330 of 2005. It is further made clear that while computing

the compensation amount, the Land Acquisition Officer to take note of order

dated 8.7.2016 passed by this Court on CAO No. 1080/2016 regarding payment

of interest.

6. CAF No. 1100 of 2016 : In view of the order passed in the appeal filed by

the Corporation and the cross-objection filed by the claimant, no orders are

required to be passed on the present application seeking permission to withdraw

the amount. Application stands disposed of accordingly. Needless to say,

original claimant would be entitled to receive compensation after calculations

are done by the Land Acquisition Officer in above terms.

JUDGE

joshi

Certificate

I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of the original signed

judgment.

Uploaded by -

H S Joshi, Private Secretary to Hon'ble Judge

Uploaded on - 27.7.2016.