The State Of Maharashtra vs Shri Laxman Savliram Ahire And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 11683 Bom

                                                                                   911 fa 670-98.doc


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                           FIRST APPEAL NO. 670 OF 1998


                        The State of Maharashtra                               ..Appellant.

                                    v/s.

                        Shri Laxman Savliram Ahire & Ors.                      ..Respondents


                        Ms. Tanaya Goswami for the Appellant/Applicant.
                        None for the Respondent.

                                                   CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED : 16th NOVEMBER, 2022.

P.C.

1. The Appellant State has challenged the judgment and Award dated

29.11.1996 (in LAR No.482 of 1990) passed by the Joint District Judge,

Nashik.

2. The Appellant State has acquired portion of land admeasuring

0.17R from Gat No.300/B of Village Palkhed, for the purpose of

construction of Canal at Ranvar. The notification under Section 4 was

published in the Official Gazette on 26.03.1987. The Land Acquisition

Officer declared the Award on 30.09.1988 and awarded compensation @

Rs.22500/- to Rs.25,000/- per Hectare. The Respondent Claimant

accepted the compensation under protest and filed a reference under

Section 18 for enhanced compensation @ Rs.1,00,000/- for Bagayat land Digitally signed by PRASANNA P PRASANNA P SALGAONKAR and Rs.75,000/- for Jirayat land. The Reference Court, after SALGAONKAR Date:

2022.11.17 19:30:13 +0530

P P SALGAONKAR 1 of 3 911 fa 670-98.doc

considering the evidence on record has enhanced the compensation to

Rs.50,000/- per Hectare. Being aggrieved by the said judgment the State

has filed this appeal.

3. Heard learned AGP for the State. I have perused the records and

considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the

respective parties.

4. The evidence on record reveals that the compensation was

enhanced on the basis of sale deed dated 12.02.1987 whereunder CW2

Nivrutti had purchased the land admeasuring 0.40 R for Rs.40,000 i.e.

Rs. 1Lakh per Hectare. The said sale deed is held to be a comparable

instance. The Reference Court has observed that the sale deed was in

respect of irrigated land, whereas the acquired land was jirayat land.

The Reference Court therefore deducted 40% and further an amount of

Rs.16,000/- towards advantageous location of the sale deed land. Thus,

on the basis of the said sale deed, the Land Reference Court enhanced

the compensation to Rs.50,000/- per Hectare.

5. The compensation enhanced by the Reference Court is less than

four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Hence

the case is squarely covered by the G.R. dated 3.11.2016. It is further to

be noted that the area of the acquired land is 0.17 R. The enhanced

compensation payable to the claimant, including the value of the land,

solatium and interest is Rs. 13,660/- and upon deducting the amount paid

by the Land Acquisition Officer, the amount payable is Rs.9410/-.

P P SALGAONKAR                                                                           2 of 3
                                                                             911 fa 670-98.doc

6. Considering that the amount enhanced is very meagre and also

considering the fact that the case is covered by G.R. dated 3.11.2016, I

am not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and award.

Hence the Appeal is dismissed.

                                                      (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)




P P SALGAONKAR                                                                         3 of 3