Bombay High Court
The State Of Maharashtra vs Dhondiram Khandappa Karajkhede on 28 April, 2021
Bench: Anil S. Kilor
fa445.03
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.445 OF 2003
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Collector, Osmanabad
...APPELLANT
(Orig. Respondent)
VERSUS
Dhondiram Khandappa Karajkhede,
Age-Major, Occu:Agri.,
R/o-Deolali, Taluka & District-Osmanabad.
...RESPONDENT
(Orig. Claimant)
...
Mr.S.S. Dande Advocate for Appellant.
None present for Respondent though served.
...
CORAM: ANIL S. KILOR, J.
DATE : 28th APRIL, 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Present appeal is arising out of the Judgment and
award dated 29th April 1994 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Osmanabad in Land Acquisition Reference No. 6
of 1993.
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:36 :::
fa445.03
2
2. The claimant was the owner of house No. 133
admeasuring 104 X 100 feet. The same was acquired for Ruibhar
Medium Project. The award was passed 30th March 1998 and on
being dissatisfied with the amount granted under the award by
the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the claimant preferred a
Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and
claimed Rs.3,50,000/- towards enhanced compensation. The
learned Reference Court, after scrutinizing oral as well as
documentary evidence, enhanced the compensation to the tune
of Rs.5,25,000/- and the same is under challenge in the present
appeal at the instance of the State.
3. I have heard learned AGP appearing for the State.
None for the respondent - claimant.
4. The only ground raised to challenge the impugned
Judgment and award, is that the enhancement is exorbitant.
5. To consider the contentions raised by the learned
AGP, I have gone through the record and proceedings and also
perused the impugned Judgment and award.
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:36 :::
fa445.03
3
6. The claimant, in support of his case for
enhancement, has examined himself on oath and one
Sharadchandra Mahadeo Parchure, who did valuation in respect
of the house.
7. There is no dispute that award 'E' statement shows
that 450.89 square meter area was acquired in respect of house
No. 113 situated at village Deolali and notification under Section
4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 10 th September
1985. The amount of compensation determined by the Special
Land Acquisition Officer was on the basis of sale instances of
adjacent villages like Ruibhar and Shekapur.
8. The valuer of the house was the Government
approved valuer. There is no dispute that the location of house
is described in the Judgment and to determine the market value
of the acquired house, the Reference Court has considered all
the relevant factors as per well settled principles of law.
9. The learned Reference Court has, in detail,
considered the location, valuation report, the qualification of the
valuer and the nature of structure of the house.
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:36 :::
fa445.03
4
10. Moreover corroborative evidence was produced in
respect of the valuation made by the valuer and on the basis of
the same, learned Reference Court has arrived at enhanced
compensation of Rs.5,25,000/-.
11. Learned AGP failed to point out any contrary
evidence or any perversity in granting enhancement to the tune
of Rs.5,25,000/-.
12. In that view of the matter, I do not find any error
committed by the Reference Court in granting enhanced
compensation to the tune of Rs.5,25,000/-.
13. However, the Judgment and award requires to be
modified to the extent of the amount of interest under Section
28 of the Land Acquisition Act is granted from the date of
possession, whereas it should have been from the date of award
as per the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in a case of
State of Maharashtra vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari1.
1 2016(4) ALL MR 513 (F.B.)
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:36 :::
fa445.03
5
10. Accordingly, the present appeal needs to be partly
allowed, as under:-
ORDER
(I) The appeal is partly allowed.
(II) The clause (vi) of the operative part of the
Judgment and award dated 29th April 1994 passed
by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in
Land Acquisition Reference No. 6 of 1993, is
modified, and it is held that the claimant is entitled
for the interest under Section 28 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, from the date of Award. For
the first year the interest would be at the rate of 9%
per annum and for the subsequent period it would be
at the rate of 15% per annum till realization of the
entire amount of the Award.
(III) No order as to costs.
[ANIL S. KILOR, J.]
asb/APR21
