(1.) All these appeals are by special leave and seek to challenge two separate judgments of the Bombay High Court. A large tract of land located within the municipal limits of Aurangabad within the State of Maharashtra was notified for acquisition under S. 3 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act prevailing in the State of Hyderabad (corresponding to S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, I of 1894), by notification dated Nov. 28, 1957, for the purpose of locating a Medical College and an attached hospital. These lands can be conveniently referred to as Navkhanda and Ahmadibag properties. Four of these appeals are by one group; being Kausalya Devi Bogra and others and the other is by Syed Yusufuddin Syed Ziauddin. Since their lands were acquired under a common notification and as would be indicated later, the appeals were disposed of by the High Court by applying a common basis and these appeals at the request of the counsel have been heard together, they are being disposed of by a common judgment. The total acquisition was of about 150 acres of land. Out of it, the first group owned about 74 acres while the claim of Yusufuddin related to about 15 acres of land.
(2.) In so far as the lands of Kausalya Devi's group are concerned, the Land Acquisition Officer determined compensation at 4 paise per square yard for the Navkhanda land in the two blocks besides statutory solatium of 15%. At the instance of the claimants reference was made to the Civil Judge who raised the compensation to 15 paise per square yard as against the claim laid at the rate of Rs. 2.50 per square yard. So far as Ahmadibag lands are concerned, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of 3 paise per square yard and on a reference to the Court, the learned Civil Judge raised the compensation to 12 paise per square yard besides the statutory solatium of 15% while the claimants had asked for compensation at the rate of Rs. 1.50 per square yard. In both the cases the claimants as also the State preferred appeals - the State challenging the enhancement and the claimants asking for more. A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court by judgment dated April 27, 1971, divided the Ahmadibag lands into three zones for the purpose of fixation of compensation; the first portion was on the east, the portion which abutted the road near the main gate up to an indicated depth was treated as the second block and the patch of land which was to the north of the second portion was treated as the third block. The High Court fixed compensation at 12 paise per square yard for the middle portion and at 9 paise per square yard for the rest of the land. So far as Navkhanda lands were concerned, the same was also divided into three zones and depending upon the location of these three blocks, compensation was fixed at 16 paise per square yard of the land in the zone abutting the road; 10 paise per square yard for the second zone and at 8 paise per square yard for the remaining lands forming the third zone. Being dissatisfied with the results obtained in the first appeals before the High Court, the claimants came before this Court by certificate under Art. 133 of the Constitution on the basis of valuation involved. Attempt was made to introduce additional evidence Aurangabad which mainly consisted of material to show that higher compensation had been given for similarly situated properties. By judgment dated March 23, 1979, in Civil Appeals Nos. 1035 and 1038 of 1972, this Court directed:
(3.) In Yusufuddin's case, as already indicated, the property acquired was around 15 acres. These lands were covered by two sectors; 10 acres and 16 gunthas appertained to Sej Nos. 3, 4 and 5 while 5 acres 32 gunthas related to Sej No. 167, and all these lands were situated close to the road leading from Aurangabad City to Panchakki. The Land Acquisition Officer had given an award of Rupees 5,454.71 inclusive of solatium of 15% for the first sector and a sum of Rupees 4,614.11 inclusive of the solatium in respect of 5 acres 32 gunthas in Sej No. 167. The appellant was aggrieved by the Award and laid claim of Rs. 40,360/- An respect of first block and Rs. 2,26,512/- in respect of the other. On the basis of the evidence placed on record, the learned Civil Judge came to hold that market value of the property on the date of the preliminary notification was Rs. 4.50 per square yard but as the claimants had claimed a lesser amount, he confined the compensation to the amount claimed and fixed the compensation accordingly. The decision of the Civil Judge was challenged in appeal as already indicated. The High Court re-assessed the evidence and came to hold that no acceptable material was on record to justify any enhancement of compensation and the Award of the Land Acquisition Officer should be sustained. Accordingly, the decision of the Civil Judge was vacated and if out of the enhanced compensation any amount had been paid, refund thereof was directed.