Bombay High Court
Waman Bhimaji Jamdar And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 1 April, 2022
Bench: R. G. Avachat
FA-1780-2019.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1780 OF 2019
1. Waman s/o Bhimaji Jamdar
Age: 52 years, Occ. Agril.,
2. Sukhdeo s/o Bhimaji Jamdar
Age: 45 years, Occ. Agril.,
Both R/o: Takli Waghdara, Tq. Khultabad,
Dist: Aurangabad ... Appellants
(Ori. Claimants)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through the Special land Acquisition Officer,
Jaikwadi Prakalp No.II,
Collector Office, Aurangabad
New Office Address is -
The Dy. Collector (Land Acquisition)
& Sub Divisional Officer,
Sub Divisional Office, Kannad,
Tal. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad
2. The Executive Engineer
Minor Irrigation (Local Sector)
Aurangabad ... Respondents
....
Mr. N. J. Pahune Patil, Advocate for appellants
Mr. S. N. Kendre, AGP for respondents State
....
CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT, J.
RESERVED ON : 20th DECEMBER, 2021
PRONOUNCED ON : 01st APRIL, 2022
1 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2022 12:26:40 :::
(( 2 )) FA-1780-2019
O R D E R :-
. This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act').
The challenge herein is to the judgment and award
dated 06.09.2013, passed by the 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Aurangabad in Land Acquisition Reference (L.A.R.) No.435
of 2004, granting enhancement of compensation. Feeling to have not
been adequately compensated, the present appeal has been preferred
for further enhancement in the amount of compensation.
2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:
The agricultural land admeasuring 77 Are in Gut
No.415, situated at village Takli Waghdara, Taluka Khultabad,
District Aurangabad, was acquired for construction of percolation
tank. The acquired land belonged to the appellant. Notification
under Section 4 of the Act was published on 11.03.1999. The award
came to be passed on 22.10.2002. The Land Acquisition Officer
(L.A.O.) awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.545/- per Are. The
Reference Court enhanced it to Rs.1050/-. The Land Acquisition
Officer offered compensation considering it to be a dry land. The
appellants claimed the acquired land to have been perennially
2 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2022 12:26:40 :::
(( 3 )) FA-1780-2019
irrigated. They have, therefore, prayed for grant of compensation at
the rate not less than Rs.2,000/- per Are.
3. The learned Advocate for the appellants would submit
that the 7/12 extract of the land was placed on record. There is
entry therein indicating existence of a way. It has now been
recognised proposition that compensation for acquisition or irrigated
land has to be at a rate double the market price of unirrigated land.
A sale instance dated 02.01.1997 was placed on record. The same
indicate that the land admeasuring 1 Hectare 21 Are was sold for
Rs.97,000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs.801/- per Are. Since the notification
under Section 4 of the Act was published two years after the sale
instance, there has to be addition in price of the land at the rate 10%
p.a. By such rise, the rate would come to Rs.969/- per Are. The
appellants, therefore, would be entitled for compensation at least the
rate of Rs.969/- per Are. The learned Advocate therefore urged for
allowing the appeal in toto.
4. The learned AGP would on the other hand submit that
the land acquired was unirrigated. A just and reasonable
compensation was in fact offered by the Land Acquisition Officer.
3 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2022 12:26:40 :::
(( 4 )) FA-1780-2019
The appellants should have been content with the enhancement
granted by the reference Court. The learned AGP supports the
impugned judgment and award.
5. Considered the submissions advanced. Perused the
evidence relied on. Gone through the impugned judgment and
award.
The land in Gut No.415 admeasured 3 Hectare 47 Ares
only 77 Are thereof was acquired for construction of percolation
tank. The acquired land belonged to the appellants. The Land
Acquisition Officer after having paid visit to the land, considered it to
be unirrigated and offered compensation at the rate Rs.545/- per
Are. The reference Court enhanced it to Rs.1050/-. The appellant
claimed it to be perennially irrigated land. 7/12 extract of the land
Gut No.415 is on record. There is entry indicating existence of well
therein. 7/12 extract is for the year 2005-2006. The Court is
required to consider status of the land as on the date of Section 4
notification i.e. 10.05.1999. The sale instance dated 02.01.1997 was
relied on to indicate the land admeasuring 1 Hectare 21 Are (121
Are) was sold for Rs.97,000/-. From the recitals of the sale-deed, it
doesn't indicate the quality of land. The reference Court considered
4 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2022 12:26:40 :::
(( 5 )) FA-1780-2019
it as unirrigated land. The appellants claimed it to be perennially
irrigated land. The 7/12 extract of the land comprised in the sale
instance was not placed on record.
It is evident from the 7/12 extract of the land Gut
No.415 that crops like sugarcane, cotton etc., are being raised. This
Court is therefore inclined to consider the acquired land to have at
least been seasonally irrigated and proposed to enhance the
compensation to the rate of Rs.1,400/- per Are.
6. Needless to mention the appellants have restricted their
claim in appeal to Rs.1,500/- per Are. True, compensation more
than one claimed may be granted, provided a case therefore is made
out. In the fitness of things, this Court is inclined to allow the appeal
partly in terms of the following order.
ORDER
(i) The appeal is partly allowed, enhancing the amount of
compensation to Rs.1,400/- per Are.
(ii) Rest of the terms of the impugned award to stand
unaltered.
[ R. G. AVACHAT, J. ]
SMS
5 of 5
