Manoj Ajabrao Nagpure vs State Of Mah. Thr. Deptt. Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 13013 Bom

                                                          1                        286-fa-441-2011.odt


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                              FIRST APPEAL NO.441/2011
                                      Manoj Nagpure
                                           Vs.
                           The State of Maharashtra and others

Office Notes, Office Memoranda                         Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders     or    directions and
Registrar's orders

                                  Mr. R.S. Nagpure, Advocate for appellant
                                  Mr. M.A. Kadu, Advocate for Respondent No.4



                                  CORAM:       AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATED : 14th DECEMBER, 2022.

The appeal challenges the judgment of the Reference Court dated 20/03/2009, though it enhances the rate of compensation of mosumbi trees of 570 trees on the ground that the actual rate ought to have been awarded was 6320 per tree.

2. The following facts are undisputed.

The claimant is owner of Gat No.298 admeasuring 5.26 HR out of which on the land admeasuring 2.06 HR sweet lime (mosambi) was planted and the balance 3.20 HR land was irrigated and was being used for taking various crops. The land is situated at village Pimpalkhuta and was acquired for the Bembla project under the Notification under Section 4 dated 17/2/2003. The LAO, had granted compensation @83,820/- per hectare for the land admeasuring 3.20 HR and compensation of Rs.736/- per tree for 570 sweet 2 286-fa-441-2011.odt

lime trees as according to him 29 trees, were not found on the spot at the time of spot inspection.

The learned Reference Court enhanced the compensation for the land admeasuring 3.20 HR to Rs.1,42,500/- per hectare and for the sweet lime trees to Rs.1750/- per tree.

The claim made, by the claimant is for rate of Rs.6320/- per tree on the ground that the note No.2 below the Form E (the valuation report for the trees) indicated that age of the trees was determined as per the earlier Section 4 Notification of June, 1999 and in the spot inspection report of October 2000. Insofar as the land is concerned, the claimant is seeking Rs.2,50,000/- per hectare, on the ground that the land admeasuring 3.20 HR land was irrigated land.

The JMR at Exh.28, indicates that though a claim was made that there were total 599 sweet lime saplings planted in a portion of the aforesaid land, in fact upon the measurement only 570 sweet lime saplings were found. It is also stated in the JMR that the land was irrigated from the adjacent river.

The valuation report in Form E for the saplings, indicates that there were early bearing fruit trees having an approximate height of 1.70 meters spread over an area of 1.25 X 1.25 Meters each. The valuation Report at Form E records the future age of the trees as 19 years and the approximate income per tree as Rs.174/-. The Miram factor, is determined as 8.610. The 3 286-fa-441-2011.odt

prospective income of the trees has been determined as Rs.895/- per tree and therefore the value of each tree has been determined as Rs.736/-. This position as enumerated at JMR at Exh.28 and the tree valuation report is not disputed by Mr. Kadu, learned counsel for the acquiring body.

As per the Government Resolution dated 27/12/1990, the average yields of various fruit trees have been indicated therein. For the sweet lime trees, it is stated that in the age between 5 to 8 years, the yield would be 100 to 250 fruits (20 to 50 Kgs.) and if the age is 9 years and onwards the yield would be 300 to 600 fruits (50 to 100 Kg) and the life of the tree would be between 20 to 30 years.

3. Mr. Nagpure, learned counsel for the appellant submits that since note No.2 in the tree valuation report indicates that the age of the tree has been determined on the basis of the earlier Section 4 Notification June, 1999, on which date the age of the sweet lime trees was six years (which Notification had lapsed), the age of the trees, as on the date of the preparation of tree valuation report in Form E, which is of the year 2002-03 and so also the date on the Section 4 Notification which was dated 17/2/2003, would be 10 years and therefore, each tree, would be having an average yield of 300 to 600 fruits (50 to 100 Kg.) per year and therefore, because of this increase in the yield, the resultant valuation for the each tree would increase, as the Miram factor would resultantly change.

4 286-fa-441-2011.odt

4. Insofar as the land rate is concerned, he relies upon the judgment in the case of VIDC Vs. Lilabai FA No. 1026/2013 decided on 01/12/2022 and other connected matters in which for the dry crop land of village Pimpalkhuta, the rate of Rs.2,10,000/- per hectare had been granted, based upon the earlier judgment in the case of Vasant Purshottam Pande Vs. Executive Engineer (FA No.1182/2018) decided on 28/1/2001 which was for irrigated land. He therefore, submits that since the JMR indicates that the land is irrigated on account of the adjacent river, the appellant would be entitled to a higher rate of minimum of Rs.2,50,000/-, which has been granted in F.A. No. 1085/2014 decided on 28/11/2019 under the same Notification for the same purpose.

5. Mr. Kadu, learned counsel for the Acquiring body seeks accommodation for a day, to place the table on record, considering which list the matter on 15/12/2022.

JUDGE

MP Deshpande

Digitally signed by:MILIND P DESHPANDE Signing Date:14.12.2022 17:21