The Executive Engineer, Nagpur ... vs Chandrabhan Vithoba Gajbhiye And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6836 Bom

                                              1




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                       NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR



First Appeal No. 1077 of 2016 

Appellant              :          The Executive Engineer,  Nagpur Medium

                                  Project, Nagpur Division, VIDC, Nagpur

                                  (at present, Nagpur Irrigation Division (N)

                                  Nagpur)

                                  versus

Respondents            :          1)  Chandrabhan Vithoba Gajbhiye, aged about

46 years, Occ: Agriculturist, resident of Isapur,

Tahsil Katol, District Nagpur

2) Godabai wd/o Vithoba Gajbhiye, aged about

65 years, Occ: nil, resident of Isapur, Tahsil

Katol, District Nagpur

3) State of Maharashtra, through the Collector,

Nagpur

4) Special Land Acquisition Officer/S.D.O.,

Katol, District Nagpur

Shri P. B. Patil, Advocate for appellant

Shri C. R. Najbile, Advocate for respondents no. 1 and 2

Ms Mrinal Naik, Asst. Govt. Pleader for respondents no. 3 and 4

Coram : S. B. Shukre, J

Dated : 6th September 2017

Oral Judgment

1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally by consent.

2. There is no need to call for Record and Proceedings as there

is no dispute about the material evidence relied upon by the Reference

Court while passing the impugned Award and thus, this appeal can be

disposed of on the basis of reflections of evidence appearing in the

impugned Award.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the

impugned Award, the following point arises for my determination:

Whether the compensation awarded by the Reference

Court is just and proper ?

4. The Reference Court while passing the impugned Award

dated 20th September 2014 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 289 of

2002 has considered the entire evidence brought on record by respondent

no. 1, but found the evidence in the nature of the circular of the Public

Works Department dated 21.8.1998 cannot be relied upon as the

Government rates do not include the cost of amenities. The acquired

property in the present case is a house along with open space, being

house no. 100/65/1 admeasuring 32.62 square meter situated at mouza

Isapur, Tahsil Katol, District Nagpur. This house was one of the

properties compulsorily acquired for the purposes of Chikhli Nala Project.

This house was situated in the submergence area of the Government. The

Reference Court found that the determination of the value of the structure

and value of the open space done by the Land Acquisition Officer is on the

lower side and, therefore, the same was enhanced to Rs. 5500/- per

square meter for the built-up area and Rs. 300/- per square meter for the

open space. Since this is not acceptable to the appellant, the appellant is

before this Court in the present appeal.

5. The circular dated 21.8.1998 issued by the Public Works

Department shows the Government rate for the constructed property as

the house involved in the present case, to be of Rs. 5500/- per square

meter. The approved valuer P.W. 2 found the rate of the structure as of

Rs. 6500/- per square meter. Thus, as rightly observed by the Reference

Court, in the valuation report (exhibit 38) submitted by the approved

valuer as no rates are prescribed on the basis of type of construction and

no details are given about the nature of construction; material used as

well as area of the construction and open plot and other necessary details,

the evidence of the approved valuer cannot be accepted for determination

of the true market value of the acquired property. On the other hand,

PWD circular is quite clear in details and serves as a guide to the Court to

arrive at correct determination of the market value of the property. In

LAC No. 281 of 2002, decided on 2.5.2014, the rate prescribed in PWD

circular which was of about Rs. 5500/- per square meter, has been relied

upon by the Reference Court. In the present case also, the Reference

Court has mentioned about such reliance being placed upon for the

purpose of determination of the rates given in the PWD circular in other

matters by the Reference Court. This was the additional reason for the

Reference Court to determine the market value of the constructed area to

be at Rs. 5500/- per square meter. I do not find any illegality or

perversity in such approach of the Reference Court, In fact, the findings

recorded by the Reference Court are based on the evidence available on

record and there is no evidence brought on record or pointed out by the

appellant before this Court to arrive at different conclusion. The open

space surrounding this house, I do not think that there is any scope for

making interference with the findings recorded in this regard by the

Reference Court. The Rference Court, it seen, has considered existence of

such facilities as ration shop, post office, electricity, Gram Panchayat,

primary education etc., situation of village Isapur on the State highway

between Katol and Saoner as also on the basis of sale instances of the

lands in nearby vicinity, found that cost of open plots in a village like

Isapur cannot be lower than Rs. 300/- per square meter and, therefore, it

was also found by the Reference Court that value of Rs. 100/- per square

meter determined for open plot by the Special Land Acquisition Officer

was on very lower side. The reasons given by the Reference Court are

logical and based upon material available on record. Therefore, I find

that value of the open space surrounding the acquired house was of Rs.

300/- per square meter and it has been rightly found to be so by the

Reference Court. In the circumstances, I find that the compensation

awarded by the Reference Court is just and proper. There is no merit in

the appeal. The point is answered accordingly.

6. In the result, appeal stands dismissed. Parties to bear their

own costs. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the amount deposited

in this Court by the appellant.

S. B. SHUKRE, J

joshi