The main legal point established in the judgment is the relevance of sale instances/exemplars from the acquired land for determining the market value and the appropriateness of deductions towards development charges based on the location and existing amenities of the acquired land.

JUDGMENT :

Shrikant D. Kulkarni, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved by the common judgment and award passed in L.A.R. No. 9 of 2001 with connected L.A.R. proceedings, the original claimant in L.A.R. No. 9 of 2001 has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

2. The brief facts of the appeal are as under:

2(i) The claimant Bhagwanrao was the owner and possessor of land Survey no. 267 admeasuring 11 Acres 30 Gunthas situated at village Shirur Tajband, Taluka Ahmedpur, District Latur. The respondent no. 1/State and respondent no. 4/M.S.1R.T.C. had acquired 3 Acres 12 Gunthas land out of land Survey no. 267 belonging to the original claimant Bhagwanrao for construction of S.T. Bust stand at Shirur Tajband.

2(ii) Respondent no. 1/State has published the notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 04.08.1977 for acquisition of 3 Acres 12 Gunthas land out of survey no. 267 and the S.L.A.O. passed the award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act on 21.07.1980.

2(iii) According to the appellants, the acquired land was converted into non agricultural purpose vide permission in the year 1972, which was prior to the notification under Section 4. The acquired land was highly useful for residential purpose. The appellants had prepared plots in the said land. The acquired land is adjacent to the Gaothan of the village as well as the highway. The Latur-Mukhed, Nanded-Latur and Nanded Udgir State highway passes through the village Shirur Tajband. The big market places like Udgir and Latur are only at a distance of 30 to 140 Kms. From the said village where the acquired land is situated. The Taluka head quarter of Ahmedpur is only 8 Kms. away. All the facilities and infrastructure are available near the acquired land such as electricity, milk dairy, water etc.

2(iv) According to the appellants, the acquired land could have fetched a very high value at Rs. 15 per sq. ft. The Land Acquisition Officer was pleased to determine the compensation of the acquired land at Rs. 0.65 paise per sq. ft. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had not considered the comparative sale instances while awarding the compensation.

2(v) It is further contended that though the reference Court was pleased to enhance the compensation in respect of acquired land at Rs. 1.50 paise per sq. ft. same is also inadequate.

2(vi) According to the appellants/original claimants, the compensation awarded by the reference Court as well as the Special land Acquisition Officer is inadequate having regard to the location of the acquired land and its use and proximity with various State highways and the Gaothan. The appellants/claimants have prayed to enhance the compensation of acquired land at Rs. 15 per sq. ft.

3. Heard Mr. Anand Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellants/original claimants, Mr. A.M. Phule, learned AGP for Respondent no. 1/State and Ms. Ranjana Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No. 4/M.S.R.T.C. Respondent no. 3 though duly served, remained absent. The appeal came to be dismissed against respondent nos. 2/1 and 2/2.

4. Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that the acquired land was converted into non agricultural purpose in the year 1972, much before the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. The acquired land was highly useful for residential purpose and accordingly the appellant had prepared plots in the acquired land. The acquired land is adjacent to Gaothan of the village as well as various State highways. The reference Court has not considered these important aspects in a proper way.

5. He submitted that the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded the compensation without considering the sale instances of relevant period. The market value determined by the Special Land Acquisition Officer as well as the reference Court is unreasonable, improper and inadequate. The appellants/claimants are entitled to receive compensation at Rs. 15 per sq. ft. According to Mr. Bhandari, learned couns