Bombay High Court
Dnyanoba Sukhdeo Chaval vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 1 September, 2016
Bench: P.R. Bora
(1) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2783 OF 2016
Udhav Bhujangrao Chawal,
Age-66 years, Occu.- Agri.,
R/o - village Wanjola,
Tq. - Mantha, Dist. - Jalna .. Appellant
(Original Claimant)
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Jalna,
having his office at Collector
Office, Jalna
2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
M.I.W. Jalna, having
his office at Collector Office, Jalna
3] The Executive Engineer
Lower Dudhana Project Division, Selu
District Parbhani. Since, this department is
abolished at present Jalna Irrigation Department,
Jalna, Office at Motibagh, Jalna,
Tq. And Dist. Jalna .. Respondents
(Original Respondents)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2784 OF 2016
Datta Mahadeo Chaval (died)
through Lrs.
Ahilyabai W/o Dattarao Chaval,
Age - 43 years, Occu.-Agri.,
R/o - village Wanjola,
Tq. - Mantha, Dist. - Jalna .. Appellant
(Original Claimant)
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Jalna,
having his office at Collector
Office, Jalna
::: Uploaded on - 03/09/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2016 00:45:14 :::
(2) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
M.I.W. Jalna, having
his office at Collector Office, Jalna
3] The Executive Engineer
Lower Dudhana Project Division, Selu
District Parbhani. Since, this department is
abolished at present Jalna Irrigation Department,
Jalna, Office at Motibagh, Jalna,
Tq. And Dist. Jalna .. Respondents
(Original Respondents)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2785 OF 2016
Dnyanoba Sukhdeo Chaval,
Age - 58 years, Occu.-Agri.,
R/o - village Wanjola,
Tq. Mantha, Dist.-Jalna
ig .. Appellant
(Original Claimant)
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Jalna,
having his office at Collector
Office, Jalna
2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
M.I.W. Jalna, having
his office at Collector Office, Jalna
3] The Executive Engineer
Lower Dudhana Project Division, Selu
District Parbhani. Since, this department is
abolished at present Jalna Irrigation Department,
Jalna, Office at Motibagh, Jalna,
Tq. And Dist. Jalna .. Respondents
(Original Respondents)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2786 OF 2016
Haribhau Ashroba Chaval,
Age : 56 years, Occu.-Agri.,
R/o Village Wanjola,
Tq.-Mantha, Dist. - Jalna .. Appellant
(Original Claimant)
::: Uploaded on - 03/09/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2016 00:45:14 :::
(3) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Jalna,
having his office at Collector
Office, Jalna
2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
M.I.W. Jalna, having
his office at Collector Office, Jalna
3] The Executive Engineer
Lower Dudhana Project Division, Selu
District Parbhani. Since, this department is
abolished at present Jalna Irrigation Department,
Jalna, Office at Motibagh, Jalna,
Tq. And Dist. Jalna
ig .. Respondents
(Original Respondents)
----
Mr. Deepak M. Kakade, Advocate for the appellants in all F.A.s
Mr. S.P. Deshmukh, AGP for the respondent/State in all matters
Mr. Ruturaj C. Patil, Advocate for respondent no.3 in all F.A.s
----
CORAM : P. R. BORA, J.
DATE : 01/09/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Heard.
2. Admit. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeals
are heard finally.
3. Since all these appeals are arising out of the common judgment and
award passed by the District Judge - 2 at Jalna in L.A.R. No. 219 of 1999 with the
connected land acquisition references decided on 17/1/2008, common arguments
were heard in these matters and I deem it appropriate to decide these appeals by
(4) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
common reasoning.
4. The lands which are the subject matter of the present appeals, were
acquired for Lower Dudhna project. Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition
Act (for short "the Act") in that regard was published on 13/7/1995, whereas the
award under section 11 of the Act came to be passed on 31/3/1999. The Special
Land Acquisition Officer (for short "the S.L.A.O.") fixed the market value of the
acquired lands ranging in between Rs.450/- per R to Rs.600/- per R and
accordingly, determined the amount of compensation to be paid to the land holders.
Dis-satisfied with the compensation so offered, the appellants - claimants filed the
reference applications under section 18 of the Act, which were forwarded by the
District Collector, Jalna to the District Court for adjudication.
. Before the reference Court, the claimants had claimed the market
value of the their acquired lands at the rate of more than Rs.2000/- per R. Certain
sale instances were placed on record by the claimants in order to substantiate the
claim so made by them. The learned Reference Court, however, determined the
market value for the jirayat land under the acquisition, at the rate of Rs.1200/- per
R, at the rate of Rs.1600/- per R for the semi-irrigated lands and for the irrigated
lands at the rate of Rs.1800/- per R.
. According to the claimants, the enhancement so granted by the
reference Court is also inadequate and, therefore, the present appeals are filed
seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation so determined by the
reference Court.
(5) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
5. When the present matters were taken up for hearing today, learned
counsel appearing for the claimants tendered across the bar, copy of the common
judgment delivered by this Court on 14 th October, 2015 (Coram : S.V.
Gangapurwala, J.) in First Appeal No. 2561 of 2015 with connected first appeals.
Learned counsel submitted that the lands which were the subject matter of the
aforesaid appeals, were also acquired for Lower Dudhna project by the same
notification. Learned counsel further submitted that all these lands which were the
subject matter of the said appeals were of village Wanjola. Learned counsel
submitted that in the decided appeals, this Court has enhanced the amount of
compensation by determining the market value of the lands, which were the subject
matter in the said appeals at the rate of Rs.1500/- per R for jirayat lands, Rs.1800/-
per R for semi-irrigated lands and Rs.2100/- per R for irrigated lands. Learned
counsel submitted that since the acquired lands which are subject matter of the
present appeals also are from village Wanjola and were acquired by the same
notification for the Lower Dudhna project, the appellants in the present appeals are
entitled for the similar compensation, as determined by this Court in the aforesaid
judgment.
6. Shri Ruturaj Patil, learned counsel appearing for the acquiring body
concedes that vide the judgment delivered by this Court (Coram : S.V.
Gangapurwala) on 14th October, 2015 in the aforesaid appeals, the amount of
compensation has been enhanced, as has been submitted by learned counsel
appearing for the appellants. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the
fact that the acquiring body has not preferred the appeals against the decision in the
aforesaid appeals, there may not be any difficulty in enhancing the amount of
(6) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
compensation, similarly, as enhanced in the aforesaid appeals.
. Learned counsel further submitted that while enhancing the amount
of compensation, the Court shall pass a speaking order as about the interest to be
paid in all these matters. Learned counsel submitted that there is lot of confusion
as about the grant of interest under section 28 and 34 of the Act and in many of the
orders passed by the reference Courts, it is noticed that the interest is being
awarded even under section 34 of the Act from the date of possession and not from
the date of award. Learned counsel read out section 28 and section 34 of the Act.
.
Learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the matter of Lila Ghosh (Smt.) (dead) through LR. Tapas Chandra Roy
Vs. State of W.B. reported in (2004) 9 S.C.C. 337. Learned counsel submitted that
the Hon'ble Supreme Court has crystallized the manner in which the interest is to be
awarded by the Court under section 28 and/or section 34 of the Act. Learned
counsel also referred to the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of State
of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari reported in 2016(3) Mh.L.J. 457.
7. Insofar as the award of interest is concerned, Shri Kakade, learned
counsel appearing for the claimants has not disputed the submission, as has been
made by Shri Patil, learned counsel appearing for the acquiring body.
8. After having considered the submissions, as advanced and more
particularly, taking into account, the fact that for the lands which were acquired for
the same project by the same notification, this Court has determined the market
value at the rate of Rs.1500/- per R for non-irrigated lands, Rs.1800/- per R for
(7) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
semi-irrigated lands and Rs.2100/- per R for irrigated lands, I do not see any reason
to adopt any other course.
. As held by the Division Bench of this Court (Coram : A.S. Oka and
F.M. Reis, JJ.) in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer (N) and another
Vs. Krishnabai Abasaheb Rane (deceased) through L.Rs. Shivajirao Abasaheb
Rane and others reported in 2011 (1) Mh.L.J. 278, the market value determined
in a judgment passed by the High Court, can also be the basis for the purpose of
determining the compensation in a subsequent matter, if the lands are acquired for
the same purpose and are from the same village.
. In the present matters also, as noted by me earlier, the lands, which
are the subject matter of the present appeals, are from village Wanjola and were
acquired for Lower Dudhna project vide notification under section 4 of the Act
published in the Government gazette on 13/7/1995. The lands which were the
subject matter in First Appeal No. 2561 of 2015 and connected First Appeals
decided by this Court (Coram : S.V. Gangapurwala, J.) on 14 th October, 2015 were
also acquired for the Lower Dudhna project. They are also from village Wanjola
and were acquired by the same notification. I have, therefore, no hesitation in
determining the amount of compensation for the lands, which are subject matter in
the present appeals, at the same rate. The appeals, therefore, deserve to be allowed
to the aforesaid extent.
9. It has to be noted that the appellants in the present appeals have filed
undertakings, waiving their right to claim the interest of the period of delay, which
has been committed by them in filing the present appeals. In view of such
(8) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
undertakings given by them, they will not be entitled to the interest for the period
of delay occurred in filing the appeals by them. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
I) The market value of the lands under acquisition in the present appeals
is determined at the rate of Rs.1500/- per R for non-irrigated lands, at the rate of
Rs.1800/- per R for semi-irrigated lands and at the rate of Rs.2100/- per R for
irrigated lands and the amount of compensation is enhanced to the aforesaid
extent.
II) The appellants are entitled for the interest as provided under section
28 of the Act on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of award till
actual payment of the compensation.
III) The appellants are entitled for the interest under section 34 of the Act
on the amount of compensation as determined by the S.L.A.O. from the date of
award till the payment of said amount by the Collector.
IV) The appellants are also entitled for the statutory benefits on the
enhanced amount of compensation.
V) The appellants shall not be entitled for the statutory benefits of the
period of delay committed by them in filing the appeals.
(9) FA 2783/2016+Judgment
VI) The appellants shall deposit the deficit Court fees, if any. After the
deficit Court fees is deposited, the modified awards be prepared accordingly.
VII) First Appeals stand allowed in above terms.
[ P. R. BORA ]
JUDGE
arp/
