Bombay High Court
Mr. Bhagwatiprasad Rambhai Patel ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 18 March, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:12606
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1605 OF 2016.
1) Bhagwatiprasad Rambhai Patel ]
(since deceased, through his legal heir and ]
representative) ]
1A) Shri. Sajag B. Patel ]
Age : 49 years, Occupation : Service, ]
R/o 37-38, La Atic Villas CHS Ltd, ]
(Formerly called Sundaram Nagar Society), ]
Opposite Old Vasna Jakat Naka, Vasna ]
Road, Vadodara - 390 015. ] ...Appellant.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, ]
Through the Collector, Thane, ]
Through the Special Land Acquisition ]
Officer, Metro Centre - III, Thane ] ...Respondent.
------------
Mr. Yash Dewal i/b Mr. Jayesh Joshi for Appellants.
Mr. A. R. Patil, AGP for Respondent-State.
------------
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.
Reserved on : 14th February, 2025.
Pronounced on : 18th March, 2025.
Judgment :
1. The First Appeal is preferred seeking further enhancement of
compensation granted by the Reference Court in judgment and award
dated 19th December, 2013 passed in Land Reference No. 77 of 2011
Sairaj 1 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short, "L.
A. Act"]. The Reference Court granted enhanced compensation at the
rate of Rs. 6/- per square metre along with all statutory benefits,
whereas Claimant had prayed for Rs. 15/- per square metre.
2. The acquired land was owned by deceased Ramchandra Haribhai
Amin and reference was filed by the executor of Will of the deceased
Ramchandra Haribhai Amin. The land in question bearing Gut Nos. 210
and 211 admeasuring 1,23,556 square metres situated at Airoli, Navi
Mumbai, District - Thane came to be acquired for the planned
development, and utilization of land in Trans Thane Creek for the
industrial, commercial and residential purposes. Section 4 notification
was issued on 20th September, 1965 and the Award was passed by the
Special Land Acquisition Officer on 15th February, 1983 granting
compensation at the rate of Rs. 3/- per sq. metre.
3. Before the Reference Court, the Claimant examined himself and
one Prabhakar Shankar Ambike, Valuer, who had valued the acquired
land at Rs. 20/- per sq. metre. As far as evidence of Valuer is
concerned, the Reference Court noted that the concerned Valuer
valued the suit property based on site visit of 2 nd January, 2013 and
mentioned the rate of Rs. 20/- per sq. metre, but had not filed any
documents to show the basis on which he had valued the land at Rs
20/- per square metre as on 15th February, 1983. The Reference Court
Sairaj 2 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
noted that Court is required to consider the market rate of suit
property during the period of notification under Section 4 of the L. A.
Act, i.e. on 20th September, 1965 and therefore, the valuation does not
assist the case of the Claimant.
4. The Reference Court further noted that witness for Respondent
i.e., the Special Land Acquisition Officer specifically admitted that she
had not filed the sale purchase transaction during the period of 1961
to 1964 on which basis the rate of the suit property is fixed and she had
further admitted that she does not know the exact location and the
fertility, etc. and she cannot tell the market rate of the suit property
during the period of 1962-1983. The Reference Court further noted
that Applicant has not filed any comparable sale instances, and that the
concerned Land Acquisition Officer had not mentioned in his award as
to the method adopted by him and on the basis for fixing the rate of
suit property. After considering the location of property, and noting
that the suit property has great potentiality, the Reference Court
enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs. 6/- per sq. metre.
5. Mr. Dewal, learned counsel appearing for Appellant would firstly
tender the judgment in Land Reference No. 42 of 1982, which arose
out of acquisition from the same Village - Airoli, for the same project
and would submit that in that case, the Reference Court had awarded
Rs. 10/- per sq. metre. He would further submit that Claimant's land is
Sairaj 3 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
advantageously located as evident from the Valuation Report, which
specifically mentions that the land had unique advantage of having two
frontages, one of Thane-Belapur road, and second on internal road. He
would further submit that location of land has been considered in the
Valuation Report and after considering the same, the Valuer had
arrived at valuation of Rs. 20/- per sq. metre. He submits that the Trial
Court had particularly noted that Land Acquisition Officer had not
mentioned in the Award the method adopted and the basis on which
the rate of compensation had been fixed. He submits that the
Reference Court had further noted that witnesses for Claimant were
examined but no fruitful material had been brought on record. He
would further submit that the Special Land Acquisition Officer in cross-
examination admitted that she does not know the location and fertility
of the said land and she cannot tell the market rate of the said land
during the period 1962-1983. He submits that the acquired land was a
large land parcel in the industrial belt, which had great market
potentiality and is required to be granted enhanced compensation
than that granted in Land Reference No. 42 of 1982.
6. Per contra, Mr. Patil, learned AGP would submit that Reference
Court specifically held that the Valuer had made the valuation of the
suit property by visiting the said property on 2nd January, 2013 and
mentioned the rate of Rs. 20/- per sq. metre for 15 th February, 1983. He
Sairaj 4 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
submits that as enhanced compensation was claimed by Claimant, the
burden was upon the Claimant. He submits that it is well-settled
position that award is only an offer and if any enhanced compensation
is sought, the burden is upon the Claimant. He submits that despite no
evidence being brought on record, the Reference Court has granted
enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs. 6/- per sq. metre, and no
further enhancement ought to be granted.
7. In view of rival contentions, the issue arising for consideration is
whether enhancement granted by the Reference Court is correct
enhancement or whether the same is required to be enhanced further.
8. It cannot be disputed that burden is upon the Claimant to adduce
cogent evidence to establish the market value of the land on the date
of publication of Section 4 notification. In the present case, the
notification under Section 4 of L.A. Act was issued on 20 th September,
1965.
9. In the case of Jawajee Nagnatham vs. Revenue Divisional
Officer and Another1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the
amount of compensation for the lands under the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 is determined by adopting the method of valuation namely :
(i) opinion of experts;
(ii) the price paid within a reasonable time in bona fide
transactions of purchase of the lands acquired or the lands
adjacent to the lands acquired and possessing similar
1 (1994) 4 SCC 595.
Sairaj 5 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
advantages; and
(iii) number of years purchase of the actual or immediately
prospective profits of the lands acquired.
10. In the present case, the Claimant has adopted the method of
valuation by expert and has examined the concerned Valuer and placed
on record the Valuation Report. The Valuation Report is dated 3 rd
January, 2013 and it may be borne in mind that the market value is to
be determined as on date of notification i.e. 20th September, 1965.
11. The location of the acquired land as noted in Paragraph No. 3 of
the Valuation Report is as under :-
3.0 About the location :
• The said property is located at Airoli-Village. The area is
approachable. The plot is adjoining Thane-Belapur road with
Thane-Belapur road on East side (part boundary) and is spread
towards west. Part of land is touching old Airoli-village road.
This Airoli village road is joining the Thane-Belapur road. Thus
the plot is located to south of Airoli village road and West of
Thane-Belapur road or to the south west of junction of Airoli
village road and Thane-Belapur road. Small part of land at the
corner of this junction is not forming part of the land parcel in
question. On the east of Thane-Belapur road and touching to
it, is TTC Industrial area, one of the largest Industrial Estate
developed by MIDC. M/s. Philips (I) Ltd. Is located across the
road.
• The land in the area has been acquired for land
development and utilization of lands for Industrial,
Commercial and Residential purposes. The Government had
declared its intentions to acquire the lands as early as in the
year 1965 and notification under section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act was issued some time in 1970 and thereafter
and as a result the land owners could not freely develop the
property in view of the intended acquisition. As indicated
above the said land had a unique advantage that it had two
frontages, one on Thane-Belapur road, and second on internal
road from the main road to village-Airoli. The acquired land is
touching the boundary of the village-Gaothan. The land is
situated on the village boundary accessible by Airoli-village
Sairaj 6 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
road as well as Thane-Belapur road.
• The area across Thane-Belapur road (Industrial area) is
provided with infrastructure facilities such as water supply,
electricity etc. The village Airoli was in existence with the area
developing in informal and formal sector. The CIDCO had
planned development of Airoli Node in the adjoining area and
work of planning and development had started. CIDCO has
been providing Bus service between Thane and Dadar of
Mumbai, via Vashi and infact Rabale Bus Depot of the Bus
service is only little away from the area. MSRTC Buses were
running from Thane to Panvel via. Thane Belapur road. Thane
and Diva Railway stations though away from the area were
approachable. There has been autorikshaws running on Thane-
Belapur road. Airoli is one of the important village of the 95
villages forming part of Navi Mumbai area.
• City & Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra
Limited (CIDCO), a Government of Maharashtra undertaking
has planned necessary physical infrastructure such as roads,
water supply, electricity, storm water drains, etc. for the area.
CIDCO has also planned/provided necessary social and
commercial infrastructure for the Airoli node, the nearest
node to the area. Transport facilities by way of buses,
autorickshaws, taxis, etc. are available.
• Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, a
Government of Maharashtra undertaking, has developed an
Industrial estate in the name and style Trans Thane Creek
(TTC) Industrial Area which is located across the harbour and is
on the east side of the Thane-Belapur Road. This Industrial
area is one of the biggest industrial areas of the state. MIDC
has developed number of plots as also factory sheds.
12. The acquired land is from Village Airoli, which is presently a
residential and commercial area of Navi Mumbai. Navi Mumbai was
conceived as planned city to address the growing population and
infrastructure challenges of Mumbai and City and Industrial
Development Corporation was responsible for planning and
development of Navi Mumbai City including creation of nodes like
Airoli. CIDCO itself was formed in the year 1970 and thereafter, there
Sairaj 7 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
was acquisition of lands for Navi Mumbai project and Navi Mumbai City
came to be developed.
13. In the year 1965, Thane-Belapur belt was an industrial belt and
the valuation report states that the acquired land is near Thane-
Belapur area. The notification under Section 4 of L.A. Act was issued on
20th September, 1965 and the market value is to be determined as on
date of notification. In the year 1965, there was not much residential
development in Thane-Belapur area which was mainly dominated by
industries. The direct railway connectivity of Village - Airoli took place
in or around the year 2004 upon starting of Trans Harbour trains and
till that time Village Airoli was connected by bus service and auto
rickshaws. It is only after the development of Navi Mumbai city that
Airoli Village gained prominence and developed.
14. The Valuation Report states that the acquired land has two
frontages one on Thane-Belapur Road and second on internal road
from main road to village Airoli. The area across Thane-Belapur road
(industrial area) is provided with infrastructure facilities such as water
supply, electricity etc. Surrounding the village is a large industrial
estate developed by Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation
and there are various industries, which are located in and around the
village. Pertinently, the Valuation Report states that the property was
visited on 2nd January, 2013 with a view to assess the compensation
Sairaj 8 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
payable for the said property as of 15th February, 1983. The location
and the characteristics of the acquired land stated in the valuation
report is based on site inspection in the year 2013, by which time there
was substantial development of entire Thane Belapur area by setting
up of Navi Mumbai City. The Valuation Report determines the
compensation payable as on 15th February, 1983 and not as on 20 th
September, 1965. The Valuation Report further does not set out the
basis for arriving at a compensation of Rs. 20/- per square metre as of
15th February, 1983 based on site visit in the year 2013.
15. The Valuation Report makes a pertinent observation that area
under consideration is undeveloped and is a large piece of land. The
Valuation Report does not refer to any comparable sale instances and
there is no statistics given for arriving at a compensation of Rs 20/- per
square metre as of 15th February, 1983. The valuation based on the site
visit of 2nd January, 2013 will not be a correct valuation of the market
value of the land on 15th February, 1983 much less of 20th September,
1965. The Reference Court had rightly held that the Valuation Report
cannot be accepted.
16. Apart from the Valuation Report, there is no other evidence,
produced by the Claimant to prove the market value of the acquired
land as on the date of notification in the year 1965 or on the date of
award dated 15th February, 1983. The evidence on record would show
Sairaj 9 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
that neither the Claimant has produced any evidence apart from the
Valuation Report nor the Special Land Acquisition Officer has filed any
sale instances during the years 1961-1964 on which basis, the rate of
property is fixed. We are therefore, confronted with the situation,
where the Land Acquisition Officer's Award is based on background
notes, which were neither produced nor proved before the Reference
Court and the award does not mention the methodology nor the sale-
purchase instances. The issue is compounded further by the evidence
of the Land Acquisition Officer that she does not know the exact
location and fertility, etc. of the suit property and she cannot tell the
market value of the suit property during the period of 1962 to 1983.
17. The burden was upon the Claimant to establish his claim for
enhanced compensation and the sole basis on which such claim was
made is the Valuation Report, which cannot be accepted for
determining the market value of the year 1965.
18. The Reference Court, by considering that the Land Acquisition
Officer's Award does not mention the methodology for fixing the
market value and after taking into consideration the location that the
property is situated in the prime area and the purpose of the
acquisition had rightly enhanced compensation to Rs. 6/- per sq. metre.
There cannot be any grievance raised by the Claimant, when the
Valuation Report could not have formed the basis for claiming
Sairaj 10 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
compensation of Rs. 20/- per sq. metre. The Land Acquisition Officer
had granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 3/- per sq. metre, which
was doubled by the Reference Court. It is well-settled that certain
guesswork in determining the market value is inevitable and when
confronted with situation when there is no cogent evidence on the
basis of which market value could have determined, the Reference
Court has rightly considered the location and determined the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 6/- per sq. metre.
19. As far as reliance placed on compensation, which has been
granted in Land Reference No. 42 of 1982 from the same village -
Airoli, Mr. Patil, had rightly pointed out that in that case, the Reference
Court had taken into consideration the land which was sold on 3 rd
March, 1966 at the rate of Rs. 7.25/- per sq. yard and land which was
sold on 3rd July, 1968, at the rate of Rs. 8/- per sq. yard and in that case,
the lands admeasured 1512 ½ sq. yards and 816 sq. yards respectively.
Whereas, in the present case, the acquired land is admeasuring
1,23,556 sq. meters and cannot be compared with the sale instances
taken into consideration in Land Reference No. 42 of 1982 as the same
relates to a small tract of land and cannot be formed a reasonable basis
for determining the market value of a larger tract of land.
20. Considering the evidence on record, the Claimant has failed to
prove that they are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 15 per
Sairaj 11 of 12
First Appeal No. 1605 of 2016 (final).doc
sq. metre or for enhancement of compensation from Rs. 6/- granted by
the Reference Court.
21. In view of the discussion above, the First Appeal stands
dismissed.
22. In view of the dismissal of the First Appeal, nothing survives for
consideration in pending Interim/Civil Applications, if any, and the
same stand disposed of.
[Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Sairaj 12 of 12
