Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 5747 Bom
Judgement Date : 8 August, 2017
fa-j 935-17.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO. 935 OF 2017
Shamrao s/o Zingraji Dhole (Dead)
through his legal heirs
1] Ramchandra Shamrao Dhole
Aged about 82 years, Occ.:Agriculturist
2] Pramod Digambar Dhole
Aged about 55 years,Occ.: Service
3] Vinod Ramchandra Dhole
Aged about 52 years, Occ. Service
4] Dinesh Ramchandra Dhole
Aged about 50 years, Occ.: Agriculturist
5] Rajendra Pandurang Dhole
Aged about 50 years, Occ.: Agriculturist
6] Surendra Digambar Dhole
Aged about 48 years, Occ.: Service
7] Narendra Digambar Dhole
Aged about 44 years, Occ.:Agriculturist
8] Virendra Pandurang Dhole
Aged about 46 years, Occ.: Agriculturist
All R/o Deurwada, Tq. Digras
Distt. Yavatmal. ....... APPELLANTS.
...V E R S U S...
1] The State of Maharashtra.
2] The Collector,
Yavatmal.
::: Uploaded on - 11/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 12/08/2017 02:00:45 :::
fa-j 935-17.odt
2
3] Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Benefitted Zone,
Arunawati Project Digras
Tq. & Distt. Yavatmal. .......RESPONDENTS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri R.J. Shinde, Advocate for the Appellants.
Shri A.M.Kadukar, AGP for the Respondents.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: S.B. SHUKRE, J.
DATE : 8 th AUGUST, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard
Admit.
Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2] There is no need to call for record and proceedings of the
Reference Application, as the issue involved in this appeal is squarely
covered by the award passed in Land Acquisition Proceeding No.
8/65/81-82 dated 16.9.1986.
3] In the present case, the acquired land is from survey
no.28/2, admeasuring 4.89 H.R., situated at village Deurwada and it
was acquired for the purpose of Arunawati Project. The Notification
under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on
25.6.1981. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 16.9.1986.
The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of the
fa-j 935-17.odt
acquired land to be of Rs.4,800/-per acre and since the appellant was
not satisfied with such determination, the appellant preferred an
application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. On merits of
the case, the Reference Court determined the rate of the land to be at
Rs.22,500/-per hectare. This rate was fixed by Reference Court in spite
of recording a finding that the acquired land was perennially irrigated
land. The appellant was not satisfied with such determination done by
the Reference Court and, therefore, the appellant is appeared before
this Court in the present appeal.
4] It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that
the issue involved in this case, which is of true and market valuation of
the acquired land is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court
rendered in the First Appeal No. 592 of 1994 dated 16.1.2017, as the
land involved in the present case is similar to the land in the said First
Appeal. On going through the judgment of this Court dated 16.1.2017, I
find that the land involved in that appeal could be equated with the
land involved in the present appeal in terms of its situation and the
similarities in quality, condition and fertility. The learned A.G.P. for the
State also does not raise any dispute about the same. This Court, for
perennially irrigated land, by its judgment dated 16.1.2017, in First
Appeal No.592 of 1994, determined the true and correct market value
of the land to be of Rs.1,30,000/- per hectare. The present land being
fa-j 935-17.odt
similar to the one involved in the First Appeal, would also fetch the
same market rate as found in the said appeal. Accordingly, I am of the
view that the market value of the land acquired in the present case,
ought to have been determined at Rs.1,30,000/- per hectare which I do
by this judgment.
5] Thus, I find that the appellant is entitled to receive the
compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,30,000/- per
hectare together with same interest and other benefits as are granted by
the Reference Court in the impugned award. However, it made clear
that the interest granted by the Reference Court at 9% per annum on
excess amount shall be for one year from the date of possession. It is
also made clear that the appellant shall not be entitled to receive any
interest on the compensation as is enhanced by this Court under this
order for the period from 10.10.1990 till date.
The impugned judgment and order stand modified in the
above terms.
The appeal is partly allowed accordingly.
If there is any deficit on account of payment of Court fee,
same shall be paid within two weeks from the date of order. No costs.
JUDGE
rgIngole
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!