SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Bom) 1214

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
The State of Maharashtra - Appellant.
Versus
Kathod Hasu Patil - Respondents.
FIRST APPEAL NO. 801 OF 1994
Decided on : 29th August, 2007

Advocates appeared
Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, AGP for the State.
Mr.D.S.Sawant for the respondent.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 54 - Appeal against enhancement of compensation. - Since finding recorded by trial Court neither perverse nor contrary to record and compensation is reasonable and fair hence appeal liable to be dismissed.

JUDGMENT:-

1. In this appeal the state has challenged the impugned order datd 12th April, 1993 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Raigad-Alibag whereby the claimant’s application has been partly allowed, and thereby the Court has granted enhanced compensation @ Rs.15/- per sq.mtr., after considering the material placed on record in para 9 which is reproduced as under:- .

"As stated above I estimated the market value of the acquired land at Rs.15/- per square metre. The total are of both the lands come to 4070 square metre. Therefore, 4070 sq. metres x Rs.15/- per sq. metre = Rs.61,050=00. the Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded total market value of the acquired land Rs.24,308.40ps. The Claimant is therefore, entitled to enhance amount of Rs.61,050.00 minus Rs.24,308.40 ps. = Rs.36,741.60 ps. towards market value. The Claimant is also entitled to additional amount on the same at the rate of 12% per annum under Section 23(1)(a) of the Land Acquisition Act, Solatium at the rate of Rs.30% under Section 23(2) and interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and proportionate costs. The issues are answered accordingly and hence I pass the following order."

2. The trial Court’s conclusion cannot be said to be perverse and contrary to the record. The compensation is reasonable and fair. Apart from this in number of matters, the Division Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Smt.Kamali Keshav Mhatre & Ors. 2005(1) 459 All M.R. 459, in reference to the land acquisition of Panvel, District Raigad, the Court has granted the compensation ranging from Rs.18/- per sq. mtr. to Rs.20/- per sq.mtr.. However, as in the present case, there is no such challenge is made by the respondent claimant, I am of the view that the appeal of the appellant challenging the said rate @ Rs.15/- per sq.mtr., is liable to be dismissed. There is no reason to interfere for the said finding arrived at.

3. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top