BOMBAY HIGH COURT
SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
Executive Engineer Bembla Canal Division Yavatmal – Appellant
Versus
Madhao Krishna Badade (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Sumanbai Madhav Badade And Others – Respondents
First Appeal No. 1760 Of 2019
Decided On : 11-11-2024
(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 18 - Appeal against compensation awarded for land acquisition - The reference court awarded compensation @ Rs.4,20,000/- per hectare, which was contested by the acquiring body as exorbitant - The court upheld the compensation based on the principle of parity with a previous judgment. (Paras 4, 9, 10)
(B) Jurisdiction of the court - The court found no perversity in the reference court's judgment, asserting that the evidence presented was appropriately assessed and the compensation was justified. (Para 9)
Facts of the case: The land bearing Gat No.3, measuring 0.11 R. was acquired for the Bembla project, and the initial compensation awarded was Rs.9,702/-. The claimants sought enhancement of this compensation citing inadequate valuation.
Findings of Court: The reference court awarded compensation based on evidence presented, leading to a total compensation of Rs.4,20,000/- per hectare, which the appeal contested but was upheld by the court.
Issues: The main issues included entitlement to enhanced compensation and the limitation of the reference petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the reference court's judgment was justified and consistent with previous rulings, emphasizing the principle of parity in compensation awards.
Result: Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.)
1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and award passed by Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Yavatmal dated 21.07.2017 in Land Acquisition Case No.166/2012.
2. The land bearing Gat No.3, admeasuring 1.37 HR. situated at village Gujari, Tahsil Ralegaon, District Yavatmal out of which land admeasuring 0.11 R. of the claimants was acquired by the appellant for the submergence of Bembla project for which Section 4 notification came to be issued on 22.02.2007. As per the award dated 10.02.2010, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs.9,702/- for acquired land. Being aggrieved by inadequate compensation, a reference seeking enhancement of compensation was moved under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. According to land owner, the valuation of the acquired land and the actual damage caused was not properly appreciated and valued.
3. The present appellant and respondent Nos.2 and 3 by filing their written statements vide Exhibit Nos.12 and 15 respectively resisted the claim. The following issues were framed by the learned reference Court at Exhibit 16 :
(2) Whether reference petition is filed within limitation?
4. Upon appreciating the evidence and relied upon the judgment passed in LAC No.32/2012 at Exhibit 29, the learned reference Court awarded compensation @ Rs.4,20,000/- per hectare to the claimants. Dissatisfaction to this, the appellant/acquiring body has filed this appeal contending that an exorbitant amount of compensation is awarded to the claimants.
5. The learned Advocate for the claimants/respondent Nos.1(A) and 1(B) relied upon the Judgment passed by this Court in First Appeal No.420/2022 (V.I.D.C. through its Executive Engineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal & Another Vs. Bapurao Nago waghade (Dead) through his legal heirs) dated 09th May, 2024 along with connected matters, wherein this Court after considering all aspects, dismissed the appeal filed by acquiring body. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the present appeal on the basis of principle of parity.
6. Perused the impugned judgment and the judgment of this Court passed in First Appeal No.420/2022 cited supra.
7. Heard learned Advocates for both sides.
8. To prove the claim, the claimants examined Anil Madhav Bakade - A.W.1 at Exhibit-24 he relied upon village and taluka maps at Exhibits 27 and 28, judgment passed in LAC No.32/2012 at Exhibit-29, 7/12 extract at Exhibit-30 and certified copy of sale deeds of Mouza Ralegaon at Exhibits 31 and 32, no evidence was adduced by the respondents.
9. The admitted facts are that land bearing Gat No.3, admeasuring 0.11 R. situated at village Gujari, Tahsil Ralegaon, District Yavatmal of the claimants was acquired by the appellant. Though it is contended that the award of compensation is at a higher rate, the evidence of A.W.1 at Exhibit-24, sale instances Exhibits-31 and 32 has been rightly appreciated by the reference Court. Learned Reference Court also relied upon the judgment passed in LAC No.32/2012 at Exhibit 29. No any perversity is noticed in the impugned judgment of the learned reference Court. The land acquired in this appeal as well as acquired in First Appeal No.420/2022 cited supra are one and same village and acquired for the same purpose. Considering this fact, this appeal is fully covered by the decision rendered in First Appeal No.420/2022 and said fact is not disputed by the appellant.
10. Considering this fact and law and applying the principle of parity, the appeal lacks merit therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
Important Point : The principle of parity in compensation awards is upheld, affirming the reference court's judgment as justified and consistent with prior rulings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of adequate compensation for acquired property under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the entitlement of claimants to receive ....
The principle of parity in compensation for land acquisition mandates that similar cases receive similar compensation rates to ensure fairness.
The principle of parity in compensation for acquired land mandates that similar cases receive consistent treatment, resulting in an enhancement of compensation to Rs.275/- per Sq. Ft.
The principle of parity in compensation rates was upheld, leading to enhanced compensation for the appellants' property based on a precedent case.
The principle of parity mandates that compensation for land acquired for similar purposes in the same locality must be equivalent, ensuring fairness in compensation assessments.
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.