Nathu Kashinath Alone (Dead) Thr. ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 9869 Bom

                                                  1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR



First Appeal No. 1182  of 2017

 

Appellant :              Nathu Kashinath Alone (Dead), through his
                         legal heir -

                         Purushottam Natthuji Alone, aged about 71 years,
                         Occ: Nil,  resident of Gurudeo Nagar, Digras, 
                         District Yavatmal

                         Versus

Respondents:             1)    The State of Maharashtra, through its 
                         Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya,
                         Mumbai

                         2) The Collector, Yavatmal

                         3) Special Land Acquisition Officer, Benefitted
                         Zone, Arunawati Project, Digras, District
                         Yavatmal


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shri R. J. Shinde, Advocate for appellant Shri Harshal Dube, AGP for respondents

Coram : S. B. Shukre, J

Dated : 20th December 2017

Oral Judgment

1. Heard. Admit. Shri Harshal Dube, learned Assistant

Government Pleader waives notice for respondents. Taken up for final

hearing forthwith by consent of parties. There is no need to call for

Record and Proceedings as the appeal can be disposed of by following the

view already taken by this Court in a connected matter.

2. In this case, the acquired land is from village Deurwada

which was acquired for submergence of Arunawati Project. For the lands

situated in the adjoining village of Deurwadi and which was acquired for

the same purpose and which was covered by the same notification as the

present land, the rate of compensation granted was of Rs. 65,000/- per

hectare. All these lands including the present land are similar to each

other and, therefore, are squarely covered by the judgment of this Court

dated 14th September 2017 rendered in First Appeal (St) No. 10719 of

2017.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents

also concedes to this fact. Therefore, this appeal deserves to be allowed

and it is allowed accordingly.

4. Appeal is partly allowed.

(a) It is declared that the appellant is entitled to receive

enhanced compensation @ Rs. 65,000/- per hectare together with the

same benefits as regards compensation for trees, interest, component,

solatium as are granted by the Reference Court in the impugned Award.

Appellant, however, shall not be entitled to receive interest on the

enhanced compensation for the delayed period i.e. from 3 rd December

1990 till date.

(b) The impugned Award stands modified in the above terms.

(c) Additional court fees shall be paid within one month from the

date of order and thereafter the enhanced compensation as granted under

this order, shall be deposited in this Court within two months, failing

which the appellant shall be at liberty to execute the decree of this Court.

        (d)     Parties to bear their own costs.



                                                      S. B. SHUKRE, J



joshi