Bombay High Court
Executive Engineer, Yavatmal Project ... vs Madan S/O Kaniram Chavan And Others on 31 January, 2024
Author: G. A. Sanap
Bench: G. A. Sanap
2024:BHC-NAG:1624
-1- 22G.FA.1493.2019.Judgment.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1493 OF 2019
APPELLANT : Executive Engineer, Yavatmal Project
Construction Division, Yavatmal,
(formerly known as Medium Irrigation
Project Division), Civil Lines,
Yavatmal, through Executive Director
Vidarbha Development Corporation,
Nagpur.
//VERSUS//
RESPONDENTS : 1. Madan S/o. Kaniram Chavan, Aged
about 65 years, Occ. : Agriculturist,
R/o. Pandhri (Karegaon), Tah. & Dist.
Yavatmal.
2. State of Maharashtra, through its
Collector, Yavatmal, Tq. & Dist.
Yavatmal.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Minor Irrigation No.1, Yavatmal, Tah.
& Dist. Yavatmal.
**************************************************************
Mr. S.K. Bhoyar, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. S.K. Gurpude, Advocate h/f. Mr. N.B. Bargat, Advocate for
Respondent No.1.
Mr. K.R. Lule, AGP for Respondent Nos.2 & 3.
**************************************************************
CORAM : G. A. SANAP, J.
DATED : 31st JANUARY, 2024.
-2- 22G.FA.1493.2019.Judgment.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT
. In this appeal, challenge is to the impugned judgment
and award dated 04.01.2016, passed by learned Joint Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Yavatmal (for short "the Reference Court"),
whereby the reference filed for enhancement of the compensation
was partly allowed.
02] The land belonging to respondent No.1, bearing Gat
No.140-B, admeasuring 0.59 HR, situated at village Kolambi, Tq.
and Dist. Yavatmal, was acquired pursuant to the notification
published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,
dated 21.09.2006 for the purpose of the Kolambi Minor Irrigation
Tank. The Award was passed on 07.07.2007. The Land
Acquisition Officer determined the price of the land at Rs.55,600/-
per hectare, Rs.20,690/- for trees. In the reference, the
compensation in respect of the land was enhanced to Rs.2,17,500/-
per hectare. The total compensation of Rs.32,500/- was granted for
the trees. According to the appellant/Acquiring Body, the
enhancement of compensation is excessive and exorbitant.
03] I have heard Mr. S.K. Bhoyar, learned advocate for the
appellant, Mr. S.K. Gurpude, learned advocate holding for Mr.
-3- 22G.FA.1493.2019.Judgment.odt
N.B. Bargat, learned advocate for Respondent No.1 and Mr. K.R.
Lule, learned AGP for respondent Nos.2 and 3. Perused the record
and proceedings.
04] Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that, as far
as the compensation awarded in respect of the land is concerned, it
is within four times of the compensation awarded by the Land
Acquisition Officer and, therefore, the Court may pass appropriate
orders. As far as the enhancement of the compensation for land is
concerned, since it is within four times of the compensation
awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the same would be
squarely covered by the Government Resolution dated 23.02.2017.
On this count, no interference is warranted.
05] As far as the trees are concerned, the compensation was
enhanced from Rs.20,690/- to Rs.32,500/-. In order to
substantiate the claim for enhancement of compensation,
respondent No.1 has examined himself as well as an expert witness.
In his evidence, respondent No.1 has provided description of the
trees. As far as the number of existing trees on the date of the
measurement is concerned, there is hardly any dispute about the
same. Witness No.3 examined by respondent No.1 is an Expert
-4- 22G.FA.1493.2019.Judgment.odt
Retired Agro-Scientist. He has deposed about the number of trees
existing on the date of the inspection as well as the height and
actual girth of the trees. The growth performance of the trees was
also mentioned in the report. According to the expert, the total
valuation of the trees was Rs.78,180/-. The Reference Court took
into consideration the evidence adduced by respondent No.1. The
Reference Court, on analysis of the evidence, did not agree with
the valuation of the trees in its entirety given by the expert witness.
The Reference Court, on the basis of the material on record,
determined the compensation for the trees at Rs.32,500/-.
06] On going through the record and particularly the reasons
recorded by the learned Judge of the Reference Court, I am
satisfied that the Court has not committed any mistake or error.
The Land Acquisition Officer did not award any compensation for
well. The Reference Court has awarded Rs.70,000/- for the well. In
the facts and circumstances, I do not see any substance in the
appeal. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
(G. A. SANAP, J.)
Vijay
Signed by: Mr. Vijay Kumar
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 09/02/2024 16:23:39
