Advocates:
[ADV ANTHONY JOE D'SILVA, 'ADV J ABREU LOBO', '', 'ADV DEEP D SHIRODKAR']

1

Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

FIRST APPEAL NO. 48 OF 2014

1. Shri. Richard Fernandes, (Since

deceased represented by his legal heirs)

la. Mrs. Dolly Fernandes,

w/o late Mr. Richard Fernandes,

aged 50 years, housewife.

1b. Mr. Gilley Fernandes,

S/o late Mr. Richard Fernandes,

aged 28 years, service and

lc. Miss. Lovely Fernandes,

d/o late Mr. Richard Fernandes,

aged 26 years, service, all residents of

15/20A, Azgar Manzil, 2^nd Floor,

Chandanwaddi, Mumbai - 2.

represented herein through their

attorney holder C/o. Shri. Jeronimo

Fernandes, P.O. Velim Carai, Salcete,

Goa

..... Appellants.

Versus.

1. Deputy Collector and S.D.O., and

Land Acquisition Officer, Quepem. 2.

2. The Director of (IPSEM) ONGC,

C/o. 84-C-Laymate Davorlin,

P.O. Navelim, Salcete, Goa.

…. Respondents.

Ms. Kimberley Gracias, holding for Mr. Anthony D'Souza,

Advocate for the Appellants.

Ms. Sulekha Kamat, Addl. Govt. Advocate for Respondent No.1.

Mr. M.B. D'Costa, Senior Advocate with Mr. John Lobo & Ms. K.

Betquecar, Advocates for Respondent No.2.

2

CORAM :

M. S. SONAK, J.

Reserved on :

Pronounced

on :

11^th February 2022

15^th February 2022

JUDGMENT: -

1.

Heard Ms. Kimberley Gracias, holding for Mr. Anthony

D’Souza, Advocate for the Appellants, Ms. Sulekha Kamat, learned

Addl. Govt. Advocate for Respondent No.1 and Mr. M.B. D'Costa,

learned Senior Advocate, who appears along with Mr. John Lobo for

Respondent No.2.

2.

This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Award dated

21/11/2013, made by the Reference Court in Land Acquisition Case

No.67/2002, dismissing the Appellants' reference seeking enhancement

of compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(said Act).

3.

By a notification dated 25/6/1990, issued under Section 4 of the

said Act, the Respondents acquired land in Village Betul-Quitol, Quepem

Taluka for setting up an Institute of Safety and Environment

Management for Petroleum Industries of India. The acquired lands

include property admeasuring 42,850 sq. metres surveyed under No.76/1

and the property admeasuring 825 sq. metres surveyed under No.76/2 of

Quitol belonging to the Appellants.

4.

By Award dated 17/6/1992, the Land Acquisition Officer

awarded compensation at the rate of ₹ 5/- per sq. metre for the paddy

field portion of the acquired property and ₹6/- per sq. metre for the

balance portion.

3

5.

The Appellants sought a reference, claiming compensation at

the rate of ₹100/- per sq. metre. The Appellants also claimed additional

compensation in respect of the trees in the acquired property. The

Reference Court, by Judgment and Award dated 23/11/2006, dismissed

the reference. This Award was challenged by the Appellants by instituting

First Appeal No.102/2007. Vide Judgment and Order dated 26/6/2012,

this Court quashed the Award dated 23/11/2006 and remanded the matter

to the Reference Court with a direction to decide the reference afresh

after hearing the parties and in the light of the observations made in the

Judgment and Order dated 26/6/2012. In particular, this Court required

the Reference Court to take into consideration the Judgment and Order of

the Division Bench dated 22/6/2010 in First Appeal No.175/2004, which

pertained to the property acquired under the same notification, but

bearing survey No. 74/1, admeasuring 92,000 sq. metres.

6.

This Court, in its Judgment and Order dated 26/6/2012,

disposing of First Appeal No.102/2007, instituted by the present

Appellants noted that the Award dated 23/11/2006 had ignored the awar