The Spl. L.A.O. Nagpur And Anr vs Baburao S/O Gunderao Lingayat
2017 Latest Caselaw 1717 Bom

                                                                      F.A.No.499/2011
                                        1

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                       BENCH AT NAGPUR

                           FIRST APPEAL NO.499 OF 2011

1.      The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
        Nagpur

2.      The Executive Engineer,
        Public Works Division No.2,
        Nagpur                                            .. Appellant

                Versus

.       Shri Baburao s/o Gunderao
        Lingayat, Aged about 45 years,
        Occu. Agriculturist,
        R/o Bazar Chowk,
        Near Poddar's Hospital,
        Ward No.14, Kalmeshwar,
        District Nagpur                                   .. Respondent

Mrs M.S. Naik, A.G.P.for appellant
Mr S.M. Ghodeswar, Advocate for respondent


                                            CORAM : N.W. SAMBRE, J.

                                            DATE     : 13th April 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The present appeal is by the acquiring body and the Land

Acquisition Officer.

2. The respondent-claimant owns agricultural land bearing Survey

No.451 admeasuring 1.49 hectare situated at Mouza Kalmeshwar.

Taluka and District Nagpur. Land to the extent of 0.36 R was acquired

pursuant to Section 4 notification dated 5th February 1998 and notice

under Section 6 was published on 8th April 1999. The Land Acquisition

Officer awarded compensation of Rs.1,33,500/- per hectare i.e. total

compensation of Rs.48,958/- and Rs.2,39,770/- for 159 orange trees.

3. As the compensation was found to be meager, Land Acquisition

Reference Case No.29 of 2007 was preferred under Section 18 of the

F.A.No.499/2011

Land Acquisition Act claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.

1,35,000/- per hectare and Rs.2,000/- per orange tree. Rs.2,00,000/-

was claimed for division of the field in multiple parts, Rs.15,000/-

towards damage to the PVC pipeline and Rs.24,000/- for twelve

orange trees. The total claim was of Rs.6,50,000/- against which the

reference Court awarded compensation of Rs.2,000/- per orange tree,

as such present appeal.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the appellant would

urge that the reference Court and the Land Acquisition Officer have

committed an error of law in awarding compensation for the orange

trees, as the compensation for the land is already awarded. According

to her, no separate compensation could have been awarded in favour

of the respondent.

5. Mr Ghodeswar, learned Counsel for the respondent - land owner

would urge that the legal position on the said issue is well settled in

catena of judgments. Having considered rival submissions, it is noted

that the claimant has examined himself at Exh.8 and one Ganesh at

Exh.17.

6. The appellant-original non-applicant has not adduced any

evidence. So far as award of compensation for the orange trees is

concerned, though the quantum thereof is not disputed, as the same

is based on the evidence of the claimant and the neighbour's

evidence, it is required to be noted that issue as regards awarding

separate compensation for the fruit bearing trees is no more res

integra. The Supreme Court has already held in the matter of

AMBYA KALYA MHATRE (Dead) THROUGH L.R.S AND ORS.VS.

F.A.No.499/2011

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, reported in (2011) 9 SCC 325

separate compensation can be awarded for the fruit bearing trees.

7. In view thereof, in my opinion, no case for interference in the

appellate jurisdiction is made out. Appeal fails, stands dismissed.

( N.W. SAMBRE, J.)

vvr