Bombay High Court
State Of Mah. Thru The Collector & ... vs Fatimabegum D/O Mirza Hamig Baig on 11 September, 2017
Bench: I.K. Jain
fa.336.08.jud 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.336 OF 2008
01] The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Yavatmal.
02] Sp. Land Acquisition Officer,
Benefitted Zone, Yavatmal. .... Appellants
-- Versus -
Fatimabegum d/o Mirza Hamig Baig,
R/o Gondwakdi, Tq. Kelapur,
Dist. Yavatmal. .... Respondent
Mrs. H.N. Prabhu, A.G.P. for the Appellants.
CORAM : KUM. INDIRA JAIN, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 11, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
This appeal takes an exception to the judgment and
award dated 17/12/2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge
Senior Division, Pandharkawada (Kelapur) in Land Acquisition
Case No.197/2002. By the said judgment and award, Reference
Court enhanced the amount of compensation at the rate of
Rs.70,000/- per hectare with consequential benefits for the
acquired land. Being aggrieved thereof, State has preferred the
present appeal.
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2017 02:01:47 :::
fa.336.08.jud 2
02] The fact giving rise to the appeal may be stated in
nutshell as under :
i. Land bearing Gat No.79, admeasuring 4.64 hectares
and Gat No.53, admeasuring 4.46 hectares situated at
Gondwakadi owned by the claimant came to be
acquired for 'Gondwakadi Tank Project' by virtue of
notification issued under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
Act' for short) on 20/10/1994. The Special Land
Acquisition Officer fixed the rate of compensation for
the acquired land of Gat No.79 at the rate of
Rs.22,000/- per hectare and of Gat No.53 at the rate
of Rs.26,000/- per hectare.
ii. Being not satisfied with the amount of compensation
determined by Special Land Acquisition Officer,
claimant approached the Reference Court under
Section 18 of the Act contending inter alia that the
acquired land is an irrigated land having deep black
cotton soil and exceptionally fertile. The soil
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2017 02:01:47 :::
fa.336.08.jud 3
conservation measures taken up by the claimant
further immensely improved the quality of land.
According to the claimant, net income from the
acquired land was Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/- per acre
every year.
iii. The next submission on behalf of the claimant was
that the land is situated near village Gondwakadi
adjoining other villages Ganeshpur, Dhoki and Tahsil
place Kelapur. It is connected with bus services
having all essential facilities available. A grievance
was made that Special Land Acquisition Officer
considering the sale instances in the vicinity
determined the compensation, which is highly
inadequate. According to the claimant, market value
of the land at the time of acquisition was at the rate
of Rs.2,50,000/- per hectare. She accordingly claimed
compensation for acquired land at the rate of
Rs.2,50,000/- per hectare with other consequential
benefits and for trees.
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2017 02:01:47 :::
fa.336.08.jud 4
iv. Respondents filed written statement [Exh.8] and
resisted the claim for enhancement of compensation.
It was denied that inadequate compensation was
determined by the Land Acquisition Officer. According
to respondents, Land Acquisition Officer upon
considering the sale instances fixed just, proper and
reasonable rate of the acquired land. It was
contended that claim was barred by limitation.
Respondents thereby urged to reject the application.
v. On the respective pleadings of the parties, Reference
Court framed issues at Exh.11. Claimant examined
her Power of Attorney PW-1 Mirza Niyajali Beg and
Jafar Patel. Respondents did not adduce any oral
evidence.
vi. On appreciation of evidence, learned Reference Court
enhanced the compensation for acquired land to
Rs.70,000/- per hectare. The claim for enhancement
of compensation for the trees was, however, rejected.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award,
State has preferred this appeal.
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2017 02:01:47 :::
fa.336.08.jud 5
03] The only issue that arises for determination in this
appeal is whether the Reference Court was justified in enhancing
the amount of compensation and the enhanced amount of
compensation is just, reasonable and proper.
04] Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that
in the similar set of facts, this Court has passed orders in First
Appeal Nos.334/2006 and 1405/2009 dated 19/07/2017 thereby
partly allowing the appeals filed by the State to the extent of
entitlement of claimant to the interest as awarded by the
Reference Court. Copy of judgment in the said appeals is placed
on record.
05] It can be seen from the facts in First Appeal
Nos.334/2006 and 1405/2009 that this Court after considering
the evidence adduced by the parties found that the acquired
land was somewhat away from Gaothan of village Gondwakdi
and it had non-agriculture potential. This Court has further held
that the Tribunal has arrived at just and fair compensation as
Rs.75,000/- per hectare.
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2017 02:01:47 :::
fa.336.08.jud 6
06] In the case on hand, evidence clearly indicates that
the acquired land was at some distance from Gaothan of village
Gondwakdi and was a dry crop land.
07] The enhancement of compensation by the Reference
Court is thus based on the evidence on record. For trees, the
claim was negatived by Reference Court to which there is no
challenge. On the basis of the judgments delivered by the
Reference Court in previous land acquisition cases referred in the
judgment and order dated 19/07/2017, by this Court in First
Appeal Nos.334/2006 and 1405/2009 and the reasons recorded
therein, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal has arrived at
just and fair compensation at the rate of Rs.70,000/- per hectare
for the acquired lands.
08] At this stage, learned Assistant Government Pleader
points out that the Reference Court has directed to pay interest
at the rate of 9% per annum from the date after 15 days of the
notice under Section 9(1) of the Act for the first year and then at
the rate of 15% per annum for subsequent period till the date of
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2017 02:01:47 :::
fa.336.08.jud 7
deposit of excess amount in the Court under Section 28 of the
Act. Learned A.G.P. submits that the direction regarding payment
of interest is not legally tenable and needs to be set aside. The
submission of learned A.G.P. cannot be said to be without
substance. To this limited extent, impugned judgment and order
has to be modified. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
I. (i) First Appeal No.336/2008 is partly allowed to the
extent of modifying the direction given in the order
by the Reference Court regarding interest, (ii) It is
held that claimant is entitled for interest at the rate
of 9% per annum from the date of possession for
the first year and at the rate of 15% per annum for
subsequent period till realization of the amount.
II. No order as to costs.
*sdw (Kum. Indira Jain, J)
