Vitthal Natthusa Sirsode vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 12241 Bom

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

                   FIRST APPEAL NO. 1611 OF 2019

       Vitthal Natthusa Sirsode (Deceased)
       Through Legal Heir

    1 Ashok Vitthal Sirsode
      Age 58 yrs. Occ. Agriculture
                                                        .. APPELLANTS
    2 Gajanan Vitthal Sirsode
      Age 50 yrs. Occ. Agriculture
      All R/o Ghuikhed, Tq. Chandur Rly.
      Dist. Amravati
                          Versus

1      The State of Maharashtra,
       Through the Collector, Camp, Amravati

2      Special Land Acquisition Officer,
       Uppar Wardha Project No.4,
       Amravati Collector's Compound, Amravati,         .. RESPONDENTS
       Tq. Dist. Amravati

3      The Executive Engineer,
       Bembla Project, Division, Yeotmal,
       Tq. Dist. Yeotmal

Mr. N.S. Bhelkar, Advocate for appellant
Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 2
Mr. M.A. Kadu, Advocate for Respondent No.3

                          CORAM:       AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

                          DATE :       28th November, 2022

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. N.S. Bhelkar, learned counsel for the

appellant, Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2

and Mr. Kadu, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 2 201-n-fa-1611-19-Judgment.odt

2. The factual position in the present appeal is as under -

Bembla River Project, District Yavatmal DATE OF NOTIFICATION U/S 4 OF THE LAC ACT 26/10/2005

Property Area of property LAO granted by Ref. Court details Award Dated granted by 06/09/2008 Award Dated 04/07/2017 ___________ Plot No: 245/2 Plot Area : Rs.140/- per Rs.500 per Village: 302.95 Sq.mtr. Sq.mt Sq.mtr.

Ghuikhed Tahsil Construction : Rs.2720.11 per Rs.3672.14 Chandur 170 per sq.mtr. sq. mtr. per sq.mtr. Railway District :

Amravati

3. The appeal challenges the judgment of the Reference

Court dated 04/07/2017, whereby the learned Reference Court has

enhanced the compensation for the open plot to Rs.500/-per sq.mtr.

in respect of plot No.91/1, as detailed above.

4. In First Appeal No. 1378 of 2018 (Sharad Gangadhar

Gulhane Vs. State) and First Appeal No. 389 of 2018 (Lilabai

Omkarrao Giri and others Vs. State) decided on 06/09/2021, this

Court, while considering the claim for enhancement of compensation

in respect of plots at village Ghuikhed had decided the compensation

to Rs.575/- per sq.mtr. The fixing of the said rate, of open plot, was

based upon the fact that the said village is located on the border of

the State Highway i.e. Aurnagabad - Nagpur Highway, about half KM

from the highway from there is an approach road to the village and 3 201-n-fa-1611-19-Judgment.odt

considering the sale deed dated 30/03/1995 of the same village, the

compensation was enhanced considering the escalation / increase

per year for a period of 10½ years and the aforesaid rate of Rs.575/-

per sq.mtr. for open plot has been fixed.

5. In the instant matter, no material, has been brought to my

notice existing on record, for me to take a different view than that

what has been already taken by this court in First Appeal No.

1378/2018 (Sharad Gangadhar Gulhane Vs. State).

6. The evidence of claimant indicates that for the purpose of

claiming the value of Rs.800/- per sq.mtr. for which he has relied

upon the sale deed dated 30/03/1995 of the same village between

Kashinath Lad and Ravindra Solanke in which the land

ademeasuring 89.86 sq.mtr. has been sold for Rs.25,000/-, which in

fact would give the rate of Rs.278.21/- per sq.mtr. As against which,

the learned Reference Court has granted an amount of Rs.500/- per

sq.mtr. for open plot. As regards the construction is concerned, it is

admitted by the claimant that the construction of the walls was in

mud, the flooring was of cement and tiles. The doors and windows

were in wood. Considering which the rate of construction, which has

been awarded by the learned Reference Court of Rs.3672/- per sq.

mtr. appears to be on a higher side, however, since there is no appeal

or cross-objection by the VIDC, the same cannot be gone into.

4 201-n-fa-1611-19-Judgment.odt

7. In view of the rate of open plot village Ghuikhed, having

already being determined by this court at Rs.575/- per sq.mtr. the

appellant, would only be entitled to that benefit and nothing else.

There is no cross appeal by the VIDC.

8. In the result, the impugned judgment under reference is

modified by enhancing the rate of open land as granted by the

learned Reference Court at Rs.500/- per sq.mtr. to Rs.575/- per

sq.mtr, as held in Sharad Gulhane (supra). Rest of the judgment of

the learned Reference Court is maintained.

9. The difference in the amount of compensation, and all

ancillary benefits arising therefrom as per the provisions of the Land

Acquisition Act, as applicable thereto be calculated and deposited in

the Reference Court within a period of eight weeks from today.

JUDGE

MP Deshpande