The State Of Maharashtra And Ors vs Gopinath Ramchandra Surnar
2017 Latest Caselaw 4958 Bom

                                        1                      36097.2016FA(st).doc

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

                   55  FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.36097 OF 2016 


1.       The State of Maharashtra,
         Through Collector, Latur 

2.       The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
         Purna Project, Latur. 

3.       The Executive Engineer,
         Irrigation Division, Latur.                             .. Appellants 
                                                             (Orig. Respondents) 
                 VERSUS

Gopinath s/o. Ramchandra Surnar, 
Age : 42 years, Occu : Agril, 
R/o. Wanjarwadi, 
Tal. Udgir, Dist. Latur                                            .. Respondent 

                                            ...

                 AGP for Applicants :   Shri. S.M. Ganachari  
                 Advocate for Respondents:  Shri. S.V. Gundre
                                          ...

                                      WITH 
                         CA/1408/2017 IN FAST/36097/2016

                                            ...

                                                     CORAM : P.R. BORA, J.

Dated: July 24, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

. As per the order passed below the application for

condonation of delay, with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing

for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing.

2 36097.2016FA(st).doc

2. The State has objected the impugned award only on one

ground that the Reference Court has determined the market value on the

basis of a comparatively small piece of land hailing from a different

village. The land was acquired for the Sillegaon project. The SLAO had

offered the compensation at the rate of Rs. 22,000/- per Hectare i.e.

Rs. 220/- per R. The reference court on the basis of evidence brought

before it, determined the market value at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per R

and accordingly enhanced the amount of compensation.

3. I have carefully perused the impugned Judgment and

Award. The Reference Court has relied upon the sale instance at

Exh. 14. The land which was the subject matter of Exh.14 was adm. 77

R and was sold at the consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/- i.e. at the rate of

Rs. 1948/- per R. Though the said land was from village Loni, some

allowances can be given considering the distance in the acquired land

and the said land, however, the said sale instance cannot be kept out of

consideration. It is brought to my notice and the evidence on record also

suggests that village Loni is not at far distance from village Wanjarwadi.

It is further revealed that the reference court has not blindly relied upon

the said sale instance. Though the consideration was received at the rate

of Rs. 1948/- per R to the said land, while determining the market value

3 36097.2016FA(st).doc

of the land which is the subject matter of the present appeal, the

reference court has considered the distinguishing factors and has

determined the market value at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per Are. It does

not appear to me that the power has been arbitrarily exercised by the

reference court or the market value as has been determined by the

reference court is without any evidence. I therefore do not see any

reason to cause any interference in the impugned Judgment and Award

so passed. Appeal being devoid of any merit, deserves to be dismissed

and is accordingly dismissed, however, without any costs.

4. Pending civil application, if any, stands disposed of.

( P.R. BORA, J. )

ggp