Advocates:
['UDAY ARUN GOSAVI', '', 'FOR/P', 'AV', 'NA', 'VIVEK G PALSHIKAR', 'GOVERNMENT PLEADER', '', 'FOR/R- &', 'AGP/R- &', 'AR WAGH/R']

1 FA 413.09.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

FIRST APPEAL NO.413 OF 2009

Vidarbha Irrigation Development

Corporation, Through its Executive

Engineer, Lower Wardha Project

Division, Wardha.

.. Appellant

.. Versus ..

1] Narayan Bhagwant Kadam,

Aged about 55 years,

R/o. Bhadod, Tahsil-Arvi,

District-Wardha.

2] State of Maharashtra,

through Collector, Wardha.

3] The Special Land Acquisition Officer,

(Lower Wardha Project), Wardha.

.. Respondents

……….

Shri U.A. Gosavi, Advocate for Appellant,

Shri A.R. Wagh, Advocate for Respondent No.1,

Shri S.A. Ashirgade, Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

……….

CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.

DATED : 14.06.2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Shri U.A. Gosavi, learned counsel for the

appellant, Shri A.R. Wagh, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and

2 FA 413.09.doc

Shri S.A. Ashirgade, learned Additional Government Pleader for

Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2.

This appeal is against the judgment of the reference

Court in L.A.C. No.38/2003, decided on 24.03.2008.

3.

The facts giving rise to the present appeal can be

summarized as under :

The respondent no.1’s property has been acquired by

the present appellant for the Lower Wardha Project. Notification

under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on

28.08.1998. After the compliance of the provisions of Sections 6

and 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, on 14.08.2001 passed an award

and granted compensation at the rate of Rs.70/- per sq. meter for

the open land and fixed the price of the houses on the basis of

valuation report submitted by the Executive Engineer to the tune of

Rs.47,773/-. The applicants received the compensation together

with solatium and component on the value of the property under

protest.

4.

The claimants have preferred reference as the SLAO

awarded compensation is inadequate and does not reflect the real

3 FA 413.09.doc

market value. The SLAO has not considered the material used for

the construction of the house. The learned Reference Court, after

considering the rival contentions, enhanced the compensation to the

tune of Rs.47,773/- and held that value of the house is Rs.90,000/-.

The said order of reference court is challenged before this Court in

the present appeal by the acquiring body.

5.

Shri Gosavi, the learned counsel for the appellant

drawn my attention to the evidence of the respondent no.1 and

evidence of one valuer Shri S.P. Mankar, who is examined by the

present respondent no.1. He has taken into consideration the sale

deed of village Nagapur. He has not verified any documents of

village Bhadod. He has also admitted in cross-examination that he

has not mentioned the description of the property or area. He has

also deposed that Nagapur is bigger village than village Bhadod. He

has clearly admitted that at the time of assessing value of the house

of Narayan Kadam, he has placed reliance on the assessment of

house of Dinkar Pawade of Nagapur and he has not personally

assessed the value of house of Narayan Kadam. He is not aware

when the house was built up and also not considered any

depreciation. On the basis of sale deed of village Nagapur, he arrived

at the conclusion about the valuation of the house of Narayan

4 FA 413.09.doc

Kadam. In view of these evidence on record, the learned Referal

Court erroneously relied on the report of Mr. Mankar and enhanced

the compensation in respect of the house of Narayan Kadam. The

judgment of the Reference Court is not only erroneous but perverse

too. Learned Referal Court ought to have held in view of cross of

Shri Mankar that the valuation report submitted by Shri Mankar,

witness of applicant cannot be relied on and ought to have been

discarded. The respondent no.1 failed to produce any documents in

support of his contentions in respect of the valuation of his house

property so as to establish what is valued b