Bombay High Court
Smt. Gomubai Alias Gomibai Maya ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. The ... on 5 September, 2023
Bench: P. K. Chavan
FA-774-2023.doc
2023:BHC-AS:26090
Shailaja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO.774 OF 2023
1. Gomubai alias Gomibai Maya Bhagat ]
(Since Deceased Through Her Legal ]
Heir and Representative, Alka Ashok ]
Chimane, Residing at Jui Kamothe, ]
Taluka Panvel, District Raigad. ]
2. Aaitubai Budhaji Mundkar, ]
Adult, Occup: Household, ]
3. Radhibai Ramesh Patil ]
Adult, Occup: Household, ]
No.2 & 3 Resident of Chinchpada, ]
Taluka: Panvel, District : Raigad. ] Appellants
(Original Claimants)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ]
Through,
1) The District Collector ]
Raigad - Alibaug And ]
2. The Special Land Acquisition ]
Officer, Metro Centre No.3, ]
Taluka Panvel, District Raigad. ] Respondents
(Original Opponents)
.....
Mr. Sachin S. Punde, for Appellant.
Mr. A.R. Patil, A.G.P, for Respondents-State.
.....
CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.
DATE : 5th September, 2023.
1 of 6
FA-774-2023.doc
JUDGMENT:
1. Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and award dated 25 th
November, 2013 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panvel
in L.A.R No.219 of 2008 under Section 28-A of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short "Act"), the appellants have
preferred this appeal.
2. Facts in brief are as under.
3. Land of the appellants came to be acquired by the
Government of Maharashtra vide Notification dated 3 rd February,
1970 under section 4(1) of the Act. The land was acquired for
setting up Satellite town of New Mumbai. It is the case of the
appellants that compensation awarded by the Special Land
Acquisition Officer (SLAO) was quite inadequate. The appellants
could not make a reference under section 18 of the Land
Acquisition Act owing to their poverty and illiteracy. They have,
therefore, moved an application under Section 28-A of the Act
before the Collector for re-determination of the amount of
compensation on the basis of award of the Court. Since several
lands from the village Vadghar, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad were
2 of 6
FA-774-2023.doc
acquired by the State, the appellants too had prayed for
enhancement of compensation @ Rs.30 per square meter.
4. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Panvel by the
impugned judgment partly allowed the application against which,
the present appeal has been filed.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.P
are ad idem to award compensation to the appellants in view of the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ambaji Dharma
Pardeshi & Ors Vs. State of Maharashtra in Civil Appeal Nos.
5088-5089 of 2013. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, having considered various judgments passed earlier by the
said Court as well as by the High Court, determined the market
value of the acquired land @ Rs.25/- per square meter. Relevant
paragraphs of the said judgment are extracted hereinbelow;
" In 1970, the Government of Maharashtra
acquired large chunks of land in 96 villages of
Raigad and Thane Districts for implementing
'New Bombay Project'. By Notification dated
3.2.1970 issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), land
measuring 4375 sq. mtrs. situated in Village
Wadghar, Panvel (Raigad) was proposed to be
acquired for setting up satellite town of New
3 of 6
FA-774-2023.doc
Bombay. The Special Land Acquisition Officer
(SLAO) passed award dated 20.9.1986 whereby
he determined market value of the acquired land
at the rate of Rs.1.50 per sq. mtr.
Although the judgment in Avinash
Dhavaji Naik case (supra) was not noticed in
Sabhia Mohammed Yusuf Abdul Hamid Mulla V.
Special Land Acquisition officer (supra), keeping
in view large number of judgments and orders
passed by the High Court in relation to the
acquisition of similar parcels of land whereby
market value of the acquired land was fixed at
Rs.25/- per sq. mtr., it must be held that the
appellants are entitled to similar relief.
We are conscious of the fact that in the
claim petition filed before the Reference Court,
the appellants had claimed compensation at the
rate of Rs.20/- per square meter only but having
regard to the fact that the High Court and this
Court had awarded compensation at the rate of
Rs.25/- per square meter in respect of identically
situated parcels of land, we are convinced that
there is every justification for awarding higher
compensation to the appellants.
In the result, the appeals are allowed, the
impugned order is set aside and it is held that the
appellants are entitled to compensation at the rate
of Rs.25/- per sq. mtr. The Respondents are
directed to pay the balance amount of
compensation to the appellants with all statutory
benefits and interest within three months from
today.
4 of 6
FA-774-2023.doc
With a view to ensure that the land
owners are not fleeced by the middleman, we
deem it proper to issue the following further
directions:-
(i) Within one month from today, the
Special Land Acquisition Officer shall depute an
officer subordinate to him not below the rank of
Naib Tehsildar or an equivalent rank, to get in
touch with the landowners and/or their legal
representatives and inform them about their
entitlement to receive the balance amount of
compensation.
(ii) The officers concerned shall instruct the
landowners and/or their legal representatives to
open savings bank account in a nationalized or
scheduled bank, in case they already do not have
such an account.
(iii) The account numbers of the landowners
and/or their legal representatives should be
furnished by the officer concerned to the Land
Acquisition officer within a period of one month.
(iv) Within next one month, the Special Land
Acquisition Officer shall deposit the amount of
compensation along with other statutory benefits
in the bank accounts of the landowners and/or
their legal representatives in the form of account
payee cheques.
With a view to do justice to other landowners
of village Wadghar whose land was acquired along
with that of the appellants but who may not have
been able to approach the Reference Court, the
5 of 6
FA-774-2023.doc
High Court and this Court due to sheer
ignorance, poverty and other similar handicaps,
we direct that they shall also be paid
compensation at the rate of Rs.25/- per sq. mtr.
with all statutory benefits and interest. This
direction is being given keeping in view of the
philosophy underlying Section 28A of the Act as
interpreted by this Court in Ramakrishna Rao v.
The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. and Anr.
(2010) 10 SCC 650 and Girimallappa v. The
Special Land Acquisition Officer M and MTP and
anr. (2012) 11 SCC 548 and in exercise of the
power vested in this Court under Article 142 of
the Constitution".
6. The appeal is allowed and disposed of in terms of the ratio
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ambaji Dharma
Pardeshi & Ors. (supra).
7. The respondents are directed to award amount of
compensation to the appellants in consonance with the ratio laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, especially in view of the
directions (i) to (iv) as above.
8. The appeal stands disposed of.
[PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]
Signed by: Shailaja Halkude
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 6 of 6
Date: 07/09/2023 15:28:55
