Bombay High Court
The Executive Engineer, Minor ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 5 July, 2017
Bench: P.R. Bora
1 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33043 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation) = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Pralhad Manikrao Ralebhat,
3. Raoshaeb Manikrao Ralebhat,
4. Baburao Manikrao Ralebhat,
5. Shiram Ramkisna Arsual,
6. Govind Anantrao Ralebhat,
7. Motiram Anantrao Ralebhat
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahemadnagar,
Appellant Nos. 3 to 7 through
S.P.A. Appellant No.2 = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33052 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
= APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
2 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
2. Dattatraya Rambhau More,
3. Kerabai Dattatrya More,
Both Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar. = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33055 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation) = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Shivaji Mahadev Pandurang Doke,
3. Bajarang Mahadev Doke (Died)
Through his legal heirs
3A. Vatchalabai W/o. Bajrang Doke,
3B. Sachin S/o. Bajarang Doke,
Age: 13 years, Minor
M/G/ Respondent No.3-A, Mother,
4. Navnath Tulsiram Doke,
5. Hanumant Navnath Doke,
6. Silawati Nawnath Doke,
All Age Major, Except
R.No.3-B, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar. = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
3 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33061 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No. 1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation) = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Gorakhnath Ghininath Doke,
3. Haribhau Ghininath Doke,
4. Kalawati Sarjerao Jagtap
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R.Nos. 2 & 3 R/o. Buthwada,
Tq. Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar,
R.No.4 R/o. Takalsing,
Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33058 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar, (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation) = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Hanumant Pandurang Doke,
Age: Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
4 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33040 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation) = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Hausabai Machindra Doke,
3. Parmeshwar Machindra Doke,
4. Bhausaheb Machindra Doke,
5. Asha Haribhau Bamdule,
6. Shobha Dada Jagtap,
7. Ujavala Rajendra Kharpude,
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R.Nos. 2 to 5 R/o. Buthwada,
Tq. Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar,
R.No.6 R/o. Takalsing
Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed,
R.No.7 R/o. Loni, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33036 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar ( Through Mah. Krishna
Vally Development Corporation = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
5 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Babu Rangnath Dhoke,
3. Bhagwan Rangnath Dhoke,
4. Laximan Rangnath Dhoke,
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar
= RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33049 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar ( Through Mah. Krishna
Vally Development Corporation = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Rama Bappaji Guambre,
3. Kaosabai Bhimrao Doke
Both Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33032 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar ( Through Mah. Krishna
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
6 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
Vally Development Corporation = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Anil Sahedu Doke,
3. Sahadu Kisan Doke,
Both Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar
Appellant Nos. 3 to 13 through
S.P.A. No.1 = RESPONDENTS
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33026 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar ( Through Mah. Krishna
Vally Development Corporation = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Sadashiv Dhondiba Doke,
3. Dattatraya Dhondiba Doke,
4. Gangubai Sadashiv Jagtap,
5. Suman Baburao Gade,
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R.Nos. 2,3 & 5 R/o. Buthwada,
Tq. Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar,
R.No.4 R/o. Takalsing
Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed = RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
7 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
(Orig. R.No.1
& Orig. Claimants)
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33011 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
Dist. Ahmednagar = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmedngar,
2. Bibishan Pandurang Doke,
3. Walmik Hanumant Doke,
U/g Hanumant Pandurang Doke,
4. Rajendra Bajrang Doke,
U/g. Bajrang Pandurang Doke,
5. Satyawan Pandurang Doke
6. Anil Sahadu Doke
7. Appasaheb Sahadu Doke
8. Kantilal Bajrang Doke
U/g. Bajrang Tukaram Doke
9. Sharad Hanumant Doke
10. Chhaya Bajrang Doke
11. Sugriv Pandurang Doke
Deceased through his L.Rs.
11-A Sojar W/o. Sugriv Doke
11-B Vanita Sugriv Doke
11-C Ganesh S/o. Sugriv Doke
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
8 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
11-D Jyoti D/o. Sugriv Doke
11-E Shobha D/o. Sugriv Doke
11-F Anuradha D/o. Sugriv Doke
12. Swati Bibishan Doke
13. Lanka Satyawan Doke
Resp. Nos. 3,4,8 Minor
Resp. Nos. 2,5,7 and 9 to 13
Age: Major, Occu: Agril.
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimant)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33023 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
Dist. Ahmednagar = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmedngar,
2. Navnath Gena Doke,
Age: Major, Occu: Agril.,
R/o. Bhutwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar,
3. Kashinath Gena Doke,
Died through his L.Rs.
3-i) Mahadeo S/o. Kashinath Doke,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Agril.,
R/o. Bhutwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar
3-ii)Kalpana Balasaheb Kaldate,
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
9 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
Age: 27 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Jamkhed, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar,
3-iii) Smt. Rukhmini Kashinath Doke
Age: 50 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Bhutwada, TQ. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar,
4. Shriram Gena Doke
Age: Major, Occu: Agril.,
R/o. Bhutwada, TQ. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar. = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimant)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33020 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
Dist. Ahmednagar = APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmedngar,
2. Hanumant Pandurang Doke,
3. Uttam Saheba Doke
4. Bajrang Pandurang Doke
5. Sukhdeo @ Sugriv Pandurang Doke,
Died through his L.Rs.
5-i Ganesh S/o. Sukhdeo @ Sugriv Doke
Age: 15 years, Minor
U/g. Mother Smt. Sojar Sugriv Doke
5-ii Jyoti Sugriv Doke
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
10 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
Age: 20 years, Occ. Household
5-iii Shobha Sugriv Doke
Age: 16 years, Minor
5-iv Anuradha Sugriv Doke
Age: 14 years, Minor
Nos. (iii) & (iv)
U/g. Of Mother
Smt. Vanita Doke
5-v. Smt. Sojar Sugriv Doke
Age: 45 years, Occu. Household
5-vi Smt. Vanita Sugriv Doke
Age: 42 years, Occu. Household
All Age: Major, Occu.: Agri,
R/o. Bhutwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33046 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
= APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmedngar,
2. Ajinath Krashna More,
3. Nivrutti Krashna More
4. Babu Krashna More,
5. Ghininath Krashna More,
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
11 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
6. Janabai Dnyoba More,
7. Nanasaheb Dnyoba More,
8. Jaganath Eknath More,
9. Pandurang Bhanudas More,
10. Gorakh Bhanudas More,
11. Rani Sambhaji Barge,
12. Rohini Dnyoba More,
13. Lalita Dnyoba More,
14. Chandrabhaga Keshav Sondge,
15. Changubai Shivram Doke,
All Age Major (Except
R.No.12 & 13, U/G. R.No.6
Mother Janabai Dnyoba More,
All Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33017 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
= APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Hanumant Pandurang Doke,
3. Bajrang Pandurang Doke,
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
12 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
4. Sugriv Pandurang Doke,
5. Bibishan Pandurang Doke,
6. Satyawan Pandurang Doke,
7. Chandrakala Pandurang Doke (Deleted)
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33029 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
Valley Development Corporation)
= APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Vithal Bhiwa Doke,
3. Rukhamini Vithal Doke,
4. Subhash Santaram Ajabe,
5. Mahesh Namdeo Doke,
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimants)
WITH
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.33014 OF 2016
The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division No.1
Ahmednagar (Through Mah. Krishna
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 09:11:28 :::
13 FA st. No. 33043/2016 & Ors.
Valley Development Corporation)
= APPELLANT
(Acquiring Body)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Ahmednagar,
2. Vishwanath Biva Doke,
3. Shalan Vishwanath Doke,
4. Laximan Malhari Doke,
5. Shivaji Malhari Doke,
6. Viajy Malhar Doke,
All Age Major, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Buthwada, Tq. Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar = RESPONDENTS
(Ori. R.No.1 &
Ori. Claimants)
-----
Mr.Gulab B. Rajale, Advocate for Appellant/s;
Mr.S.P. Sonpawale, AGP for Respondent/State;
Mr.C.K. Shinde, Advocate for
Respondents/orig.Claimants in respective matters
-----
CORAM : P.R.BORA, J.
DATE :
5 th
July,2017.
PER COURT :
1) With consent of the learned Counsel
appearing for the respective parties, taken
up for final disposal. In two matters, i.e.
First Appeal St.Nos.33046/2016 and 33017/2016,
the original claimants though were duly
served, have not entered their appearance.
2) Learned Counsel appearing for the
acquiring body submitted that the reason for
filing these appeals is mainly that the
acquiring body was not made party in the
proceedings before the Reference Court and as
such, in fact, the entire Judgment and Award
deserves to be quashed and set aside. The
learned Counsel relied upon the judgment in
the case of Delhi Development Authority Vs.
Bhola Nath Sharma (Dead) By L.Rs. And Ors. -
(2011) 2 SCC 54, and submitted that the
impugned judgment needs to be set aside on
this ground alone and the matters need to be
remitted back for deciding the same afresh.
3) The leaned Counsel further submitted
that the Special Land Acquisition Officer had
correctly assessed the market value of the
acquired lands and has accordingly offered the
amount of compensation. The learned Counsel
submitted that the Special Land Acquisition
Officer had offered the compensation @
Rs.750/- per Are for Jirayat land and @ Rs.
1125/- to Rs.1151/- per Are for the irrigated
land.
. The learned Counsel submitted that
the compensation so offered by the Special
Land Acquisition Officer was after his
consideration of several sale instances as
well as taking into account the overall
circumstances and after having physically
visited the acquired lands. In such
circumstances, in fact, there was no need of
any enhancement in the amount of compensation
so offered by the Special Land Acquisition
Officer. The learned Counsel further
submitted that the Reference Court, without
there being any cogent and sufficient
evidence, has enhanced the amount of
compensation by determining the market value
of the irrigated land @ Rs. 1575/- per Are and
@ Rs. 787/- for the Jirayat land. The learned
Counsel submitted that while awarding the
interest also, the learned Reference Court has
committed certain mistakes, which also need to
be rectified in the appeals.
4) Shri Shinde, learned Counsel
appearing for the respondents, i.e. original
claimants, resisted the submissions made on
behalf of the acquiring body. The learned
Counsel submitted that all the objections
which are now raised in the appeals were
raised by the State before the Reference
Court. The learned Counsel submitted that all
these grounds are turned down by the Reference
Court by giving proper reasons there for.
. The learned Counsel submitted that
merely because the acquiring body was not made
party in the proceedings before the court
below cannot be a reason for setting aside the
impugned award, as no prejudice has been
caused to the acquiring body. The learned
Counsel further submitted that the Executive
Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Division No.1, was
very well party to the proceedings before the
Reference Court, who is now the office In-
charge in Krishna Valley Development
Corporation, i.e. present appellant. The
learned Counsel submitted that when the State
was made party and the State had defended the
applications, the contention raised on behalf
of the present appellant that they were not
properly represented, cannot be accepted.
5) In so far as determination of the
market value by the Reference Court is
concerned, the learned Counsel pointed out
that the Reference Court has enhanced the
amount of compensation by determining the
market value of the Jirayat land @ Rs. 787/-
per Are, for which, the Special Land
Acquisition Officer had offered the
compensation @ Rs.750/- per Are. The learned
Counsel submitted that the Reference Court has
given the hike of Rs.37/- per Are only while
deciding the Reference Applications. The
learned Counsel submitted that similarly while
determining the market value of the irrigated
land, the Reference Court has enhanced the
amount of compensation from the rate of
Rs.1151/- to Rs. 1575/- per Are. The learned
Counsel submitted that the said hike has also
been given by the Reference Court after having
taken into account the sale instances placed
on record by the claimants. The learned
Counsel submitted that, in fact, the Reference
Court has caused injustice to the claimants by
taking a conservative view in determining the
market value at the lesser rate than expected
by the claimants. The learned Counsel
submitted that since the Reference Court has
moderately enhanced the amount of
compensation, no interference is required in
the common impugned Judgment and Award. The
learned Counsel, therefore, submitted for
dismissal of the appeals.
6) I have carefully considered the
submissions advanced by learned Counsel for
the respective parties. In so far as first
issue raised on behalf of the appellant that
it was not party before the Reference Court,
is concerned, it has to be stated that the
Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation was party
before the Reference Court, the authority, who
is now incharge of the affairs of the present
project. Merely because the acquiring body in
its name was not made party before the
Reference Court would not have any adverse
effect. Moreover, the State was duly
represented and, therefore, also it may not be
correct on the part of the acquiring body to
say that it was not properly represented. The
said objection, therefore, is liable to be
rejected and is accordingly rejected.
7) In so far as determination of the
market value is concerned, I need not to make
any more discussion on the point in view of
the fact that the amount of compensation has
been very moderately enhanced by the Reference
Court. To enhance the compensation from
Rs.750/- per Are to Rs.787/- per Are, cannot
be in any way said to be arbitrary or on
higher side. Similarly, in determining the
market value of the irrigated lands @ Rs.
1575/- per Are for which the Special Land
Acquisition Officer had offered the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 1151/- per Are
also cannot be said to be unreasonable or
excessive. It further appears that the market
value, as has been determined by the Reference
Court is based on the evidence which was
adduced before it. Admittedly, the evidence
adduced was only by the claimants and no
evidence was adduced by the State. In such
circumstances, it does not appear to me that
any interference is required in the common
impugned Judgment and Award. The appeals being
devoid of any merits, deserve to be dismissed
and are accordingly dismissed, however,
without any order as to costs. Pending civil
application, if any, stands disposed of.
8) The amount deposited by the acquiring
body in this Court be transferred to the
Reference Court along with interest accrued
thereon so as to facilitate withdrawal of the
said amount by the original claimants from the
Reference Court.
(P.R.BORA,J.)
bdv/
