Bombay High Court
Moreshwar S/O Krushnarao ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 30 November, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
86fa1714.18.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.1714/2019
Moreshwar Krushnarao Jawanjal and anr ..vrs... The State of
Maharashtra and others
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S.A.Mohta, Advocate for appellants
Shri M.A. Kadu, Advocate for respondent no.3
Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 30/11/2022
1] Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2] The factual position in the present appeal is as under -
Bembla River Project, District Yavatmal
Date of Notification under Section 4 of the Land 26/10/2005
Acquisition Act.
Property Area of property LAO Award Dated Ref. Court
details 06/09/2008 Award Dated
14/08/2017
Plot No: 165 Plot Area : 389.2 ₹.140/- per ₹.500/- per
Village: Sq.mtr. Sq.mt Sq.mtr.
Ghuikhed
Tahsil Construction: ₹.1179/- per Sq. ₹.1592/- per
Chandur 243.2 Sq.mtr. mtr. Sq. mtr.
Railway
District :
Amravati
3] The appeal challenges the judgment of the Reference
Court dated 14/08/17, whereby the learned Reference Court has
86fa1714.18.odt
enhanced the compensation for the open plot to ₹.500/-per square
meter and has granted compensation for the constructed area at the
rate of ₹.1592/- per square meter in respect of plot No.165, as
detailed above.
4] In First Appeal No.1378/2018 (Sharad Gangadhar
Gulhane Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Camp,
Amravati and others) and First Appeal No.389/2018 (Lilabai
Omkarrao Giri and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the
Collector, Camp, Amravati and others) 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
at ₹.575/- per square meter. 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. Aurangabad - Nagpur Highway, about half
kilometer from the highway there is an approach road to the village
and 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 ₹.575/-
per square meter for open plot has been fixed.
86fa1714.18.odt
5] In the instant matter, no material, has been brought to
my notice existing on record, for me to take a different view than
what has been already taken by this Court in First Appeal
No.1378/2018 (Sharad Gangadhar Gulhane Vs. The State of
Maharashtra through the Collector, Camp, Amravati and others).
6] In so far as the construction is concerned, there is no
report of an expert on record indicating the valuation of the
construction, nor is there anything on record to indicate the nature
and quality of construction, apart from what has been considered by
the LAO in his valuation report at Appendix-A Exh.24, which
indicates that the foundation was in UCR in mud mortar, CR
masonry, mud walls and tin roof which PCC floor. Considering this
nature of construction, the LAO had granted the rate of ₹. 1179/-
per square meter, which has been enhanced by the Reference Court
to ₹.1592/- per square meter.
7] Though Mr. Mohta, learned counsel for the appellant
relies upon the judgment in F.A. No.1264/2013 and other connected
matters, decided on 15.6.2015, to contend that based upon the
circular dated 3.1.1991 issued by the Chief Engineer, Amravati, the
86fa1714.18.odt
Appellant would be entitled to a rate of ₹.1700/- per square meter,
however, a perusal of the judgment of the Reference Court would
indicate that the circular dated 3.1.1991 has been indeed considered
while determining the compensation based upon the nature of
construction as reflected in Exh.24. Nothing has been brought to my
notice to indicate that the nature of construction was not what is
listed in Exh.24, but was of a higher quality so as to merit
enhancement, that too based upon the circular dated 3.1.1991. It is
apt to note that there cannot be a strait jacket formula for
determining the compensation for construction as the rate of
construction depends upon the nature and quality of construction,
which can differ from house to house. I am therefore not persuaded
to take a view different than what has been taken by the learned
Reference Court in the matter of awarding the rate of construction.
8] That being the position, in view of the rate of open plot
of village Ghuikhed, having already been determined by this Court
at Rs.575/- per square meter, the appellant, would only be entitled
to that benefit and nothing else.
9] In the result, the impugned judgment under reference is
86fa1714.18.odt
modified by enhancing the rate of open land as granted by the
learned Reference Court at ₹.500/- per square meter to ₹.575/- per
square meter, as held in Sharad Gangadhar Gulhane (supra). Rest of
the judgment of the learned Reference Court is maintained.
10] 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. The
difference in the court fee shall be deposited within a week from the
date of determination of the enhanced amount to which the
appellant would be entitled to in terms of this order.
11] The first appeal is partly allowed and disposed of
accordingly. All pending civil applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of. No order as to costs.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Rvjalit
Digitally sign byRAJESH
VASANTRAO JALIT
Location:
Signing Date:01.12.2022 17:28
