The determination of land acquisition compensation must reflect market value while considering land use potential and comparability to similar properties.

ORAL JUDGMENT

The above appeals have been taken up together for hearing pursuant to the order passed by this Court as all the appeals challenge the same judgment and award passed by the Reference Court. The parties shall be referred to as they appear in the impugned judgment.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are as follows :

By notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( herein after referred to as “the said Act”) dated 18.10.1991 published in the Official Gazette dated 21.10.1991, several lands in Poroscodem Village and in Caznem Village of Pernem Taluka were notified to be acquired for the construction of a new B.G. line for Konkan railway. Amongst the lands which were acquired having an area of 812300 square metres 85 plots in which the applicants were interested parties came to be acquired. 64 plots out of the said plots located in different survey numbers admeasuring an area of 54,490 square metres were acquired from Poroscodem Village and 31 plots having an area of 26740 square metres were acquired from Caznem Village. By an award passed under Section 11 of the said Act dated 26.11.1993, compensation was offered for the land acquired at the rate of Rs.10/- per square metre for garden land and Rs.9/- per square metre for the paddy field besides compensation for the trees. Being dissatisfied with the said amount, the applicants preferred a reference under Section 18 of the said Act and claimed enhancement of compensation at the rate of Rs.125/- per square metre. The learned Reference Court after recording of evidence by the impugned judgment and award partly allowed the said reference and held that the applicants are entitled for excess compensation of Rs.65/- per square metre for the land acquired admeasuring an area of 13850 square metres from the property surveyed under no.23; an excess compensation of Rs.50/- per square metre for the land acquired admeasuring an area of 575 square metres from the property surveyed under no.27; an excess compensation of Rs.36/- per square metre for the land acquired admeasuring an area of 115 square metres from the property surveyed under no.25/25; and also an excess compensation of Rs.21/- per square metre for the paddy field land admeasuring an area of 1500 square metres from the property surveyed under No.30/9 and 375 square metres from the property surveyed under no.32/1. The Reference Court also awarded the statutory benefits in accordance with law. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the applicants and the respondents have preferred the present appeals.

3. Mr. A. D. Bhobe, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/Acquiring Body has assailed the impugned judgment passed by the Reference Court on the ground that the Reference Court has relied upon a sale deed dated 05.04.1991 at Exhibit 51 which is not at all comparable to the land acquired. The learned counsel has pointed out that the said sale deed is at a distance of 3 Kms from the acquired land and as such not at all comparable to the land acquired. The learned counsel further pointed out that the land which was the subject matter of the present acquisition was inferior than the land in the sale deed as according to him agricultural land had no potentiality of being used for non agricultural purpose. The learned counsel further pointed out that the acquired land was in a remote of a village which had no development potential and as such the Reference Court was not justified to fix the compensation on the basis of the sale deed at Exhibit 51 which was only admeasuring 600 square metres and