IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Shrikant D. Kulkarni, J.
Suwalal S/o Dagdulal Kotecha & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
First Appeal No. 751 of 2006 With Civil Application No. 3732 of 2019
Decided On : 27-04-2022
Land Acquisition - Compensation - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4, Section 12(2) - The court allowed the appeal and quashed the impugned judgment and award passed by the reference Court. The appellant/claimant was entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 99,787/- along with statutory benefits available under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of 71 R area acquired by the State. The respondent/State was directed to pay the enhanced amount of compensation within three (3) months from the date of the judgment. No order as to costs.
Fact of the Case:
The land admeasuring 71 R from the land survey No.151 situated at village Nandur Ghat, Tq. Kaij, Dist. Beed owned and possessed by the claimants came to be acquired for the purpose of 33 K.V. Substation of M.S.E.B. at Nandur Ghat. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs.65,780/- to the appellant/claimant. The appellant /claimant received the compensation under protest and filed the reference before the Special Land Acquisition Officer praying for enhancement of compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the possession of the acquired land was not taken by invoking the urgency clause, but by way of private negotiation. The court considered the sale instances and evidence on record to determine the market value of the acquired land. It allowed the appeal and awarded enhanced compensation to the appellants/claimants.
Issues: The main issue was the determination of the compensation for the acquired land, considering the possession, market value, and sale instances presented by the appellant/claimants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence of sale instances and the legal provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to determine the market value of the acquired land and award enhanced compensation to the appellants/claimants.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned judgment and award were quashed. The appellant/claimant was entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 99,787/- along with statutory benefits available under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of 71 R area acquired by the State. The respondent/State was directed to pay the enhanced amount of compensation within three (3) months from the date of the judgment. No order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and award passed in L.A.R. No. 68 of 1998 by the reference Court/2nd Adhoc Additional District Judge, Ambejogai.
2. The facts giving rise to this the appeal in narrow compass are as under:
2(a) The land admeasuring 71 R from the land survey No.151 situated at village Nandur Ghat, Tq. Kaij, Dist. Beed owned and possessed by the claimants came to be acquired for the purpose of 33 K.V. Substation of M.S.E.B. at Nandur Ghat.
2(b) The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the L.A.Act'). was published in respect of acquired land on 04.12.1992.
2(c) The respondent/State took over possession of the acquired land on 21.11.1990.
2(d) The Special Land Acquisition Officer was pleased to award the compensation at the rate of Rs.65,780/- to the appellant/claimant. The notice of award under Section 12(2) of the L.A. Act came to be served on the appellant/claimant on 26.01.1997. The appellant /claimant received the compensation under protest and filed the reference before the Special Land Acquisition Officer praying that a reference be made over to the Civil Court for enhancement of compensation at the rate of Rs.16,145.85 ps. Per R (i.e. Rs. 15 per Sq. Ft. and Rs.15,000/- for the mango tree). The total compensation was claimed of Rs.11,77,244/- with statutory benefits. The reference was accordingly made over vide L.A.R. No.68/1998.
2(e) The reference Court after considering the rival pleadings of the parties, evidence on record and considering the argument advanced on behalf of both the sides, was pleased to dismiss the the reference.
3. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award passed by the reference Court. The original claimants have preferred this appeal by taking aid of Section 54 of the Act.
4. Heard Mr. Anand P. Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants and Mr. S.G. Sangle, learned A.G.P. for the respondent/State.
5. Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the possession of the acquired land was taken on 21.11.1990 by invoking the urgency clause by private negotiation. After lapse of two years, the Special Land Acquisition Officer was pleased to pass the award. He submitted that at the relevant point of time, it was mandatory on the S.L.A.O. to pass the award within two ye64ars from the date of notification under Section 4 of the L.A.Act. He submitted that the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act was Rs.15 per Sq. Ft. The appellants/claimants have also produced sufficient oral and documentary evidence in support of their claim for enhancement. No contra evidence is produced by the State. He submitted that by way of additional evidence, certain sale instances are placed on record. The certified copies of the sale instances are admissible in evidence under Section 51-A of the L.A. Act. He submitted that the appellants/claimants are entitled to get compensation of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.15/- per Sq. Ft.
6. Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel for the appellants / claimants submitted that the reference Court has failed to appreciate the evidence placed on record by the appellants in a proper way and determined the market value of the acquired land at a lower side. He submitted that there was a mango tree in the acquired land and the appellant was getting Rs. 3,000/- per year. The reference Court ought to have awarded the compensation in respect of mango tree of Rs.20,000/-. He submitted that at the relevant point of time, the market value of the acquired land in the adjacent area was in the range of Rs. 15,000/- to Rs.20,000 per R as being used for residence purpose.
7. Mr. Bhandari learned counsel has placed reliance on the following stock of citations in support of his argument.
(i) Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (Registered) F
Bijender and Ors. Vs. State of Harayana and Anr.
Chimanlal Hargovinddas Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer
Indian Council of Medical Research Vs. T.N. Sanikop and Ors.
Kasturi and others Vs. State of Haryana
M.V.K. Gundarao Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer (L.A.O), Narasaraopet
Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (Registered) Faridkot and others Vs. State of Punjab and others
Subh Ram and others Vs. Harayan State and another
Trishala Jain Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Vithal Rao and Anr. Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation for acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, based on possession, market value, and sale instances pre....
The potentiality of acquired land and comparable sale instances are crucial for determining fair compensation under the Land Acquisition Act.
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 dev....
The court upheld the principle that market value for compensation is determined by development potential and proximity to urban areas, allowing enhanced compensation despite procedural challenges in ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on evidence to determine compensation for acquired land, including the assessment of non-agricultural potentiality, comparable sale in....
Court reaffirms right to fair market value in land acquisition, stressing reliance on genuine comparable sales and entitlement to higher solatium and interest.
The determination of market value for compensation under the Land Acquisition Act should be based on genuine sale instances and the claimant's evidence, and a reference under sec. 18 is an original p....
In land acquisition references, the court must independently assess market value based on evidence. Where direct vacant land sale instances are unavailable, valuations derived from adjusted built-up ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.