Bombay High Court
Sunil Dyanba Gunjukar vs The State Of Mah. Thru. Collector on 23 May, 2017
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
fa748.07+.J.odt 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.748 OF 2007
Narayan Shripat Gunjkar
since deceased through legal heirs.
1] Pundlik Narayan Gunjkar,
Aged 44 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
2] Pandurang Naryan Gunjkar,
Aged 48 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
3] Sou. Kokilabai Uddhavrao Dighe,
Aged 58 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
4] Sou. Gokarnabai Sitaram Shinde,
Aged 55 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
No.1 and 2 r/o Naigaon Khurd,
Tq. Chikhli, No.3 r/o Isoli,
Tq. Chikhli No.4 R/o Hiwra Khurd,
Tq. Mehkar, Dist. Buldhana. ....... APPELLANTS
...V E R S U S...
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector, Buldana. ....... RESPONDENT
FIRST APPEAL NO.385 OF 2008
Sunil Dyanba Gunjkar
Aged Adult, Occupation: Agriculturist,
R/o Naygaon Khurd, Tahsil Chikhli,
District Buldhana. ....... APPELLANT
...V E R S U S...
The State of Maharashtra through
Collector, Buldana. ....... RESPONDENT
::: Uploaded on - 25/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2017 00:46:34 :::
fa748.07+.J.odt 2/5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri M.S. Abbasi, Advocate for Appellants.
Ms. Shamsi Haider, A.G.P. for Respondent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE: 23 rd
MAY, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1] Heard Shri Abbasi, Advocate for appellant and
Ms. Haider, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for
respondent-State. The judgment dated 25.01.2007 delivered by
Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana in Land Acquisition
Case No.29 of 2000 is questioned by land-owner in this appeal
under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act. Short submission of
Shri Abbasi, Advocate is that for lands constituting part of very
same gat number, compensation at higher rate has been awarded
by Reference Court only and that compensation has been upheld
by this Court while deciding First Appeal No.1099 of 2008 and
other ten connected matters on 14.09.2012. He, therefore, prays
for similar relief.
2] Learned Assistant Government Pleader has opposed
the contentions. According to her, with due application of mind,
rate of Rs.1,37,500/- per hectare has been worked out by
fa748.07+.J.odt 3/5
Reference Court in paragraph 12 of its judgment. There is no
perversity in it and hence, the judgment delivered by this Court
dated 14.09.2012 has no application.
3] The short question involved is whether the appellant
before this Court is entitled to receive compensation at the rate of
Rs.1,42,500/- per hectare as per judgment of this Court dated
14.09.2012.
4] Perusal of judgment dated 14.09.2012 delivered by
this Court in First Appeal No.1099 of 2008 and other ten
connected matters reveals that survey numbers and gat numbers
out of which land was acquired are mentioned in its paragraph 2.
Gat number of appellants i.e. Gat No.110 is mentioned at Serial
No.4 and 5. 0.60 hectare of land belonging to Pundlik has been
acquired and reference proceeding in relation thereto were
registered as Land Acquisition Case No.509 of 2009. 0.59 hectare
of land out of very same Gat No.110 belonging to Pandurang also
acquired from same gat formed subject-matter of Land Acquisition
Case No.509 of 2009. Perusal of paragraph 3 of the judgment
delivered by this Court reveals that this Court has accepted rate of
Rs.1,42,500/- per hectare as correct market rate for irrigated land.
fa748.07+.J.odt 4/5
It is apparent from observations in paragraph 7 of said judgment.
5] Here, it is not in dispute that the land admeasuring
1.53 R of present appellant acquired by the respondent is from
very same Gat No.110. Reference Court has in its judgment in
paragraph 12 found said land irrigated. This finding has become
final and State Government has not challenged the same before
this Court.
6] In view of this material, it is apparent that for
irrigated land acquired out of same survey number, appellant is
entitled to receive Rs.1,42,500/- per hectare as per judgment
dated 14.09.2012 delivered by this Court in First Appeal No.1099
of 2008.
7] In First Appeal No.385 of 2008, land of appellant
acquired for same project in same land acquisition proceeding is
from Gat No.12 and its area is 1 H 48 R. Observations by
Reference Court in paragraph 11 show that it was also irrigated
land. Discussion above in relation to land Gat No.110 involved in
two appeals (supra) holds good even for land of the appellant in
Gat No.12. In this situation, said appellant is, therefore, entitled to
fa748.07+.J.odt 5/5
compensation calculated at the rate of Rs.1,42,500/- per hectare.
8] Accordingly, the appeals are partly allowed.
Amount due and payable to the appellants as compensation for
land shall be calculated at Rs.1,42,500/- per hectare and the
balance amount due shall accordingly be determined within next
three months. Interest on it at 9% along with other benefits as
mentioned in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment delivered by
Reference Court shall also be calculated in said period.
Final compensation amount thus worked out be paid to the
respective appellant within next three months.
9] Accordingly, appeals are allowed and disposed of.
No costs.
JUDGE
NSN
