LAWS(GJH)-2007-4-67

NARHARI VASUDEV PANCHOLI Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

Decided On April 23, 2007
NARHARI VASUDEV PANCHOLI Appellant
V/S
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal arises against, the judgement and the award passed by the reference court dated 28.02.1996 whereby the reference is dismissed.

(2.) The short facts appear to be that the proposal was moved for acquisition of the land belonging to the appellants admeasuring 1 Hectare 19 Are 38 Sq. Mtrs. (11,938 Sq. Mtrs) situated at village Wadhwan. Thereafter, notification under section 4 of Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to "as to the Act"} was published on 08.11.1979. The notification under section 6 of the Act was published on 04.11.1982 and emergency clause was applied and the possession was taken over on 30.12.1983. It appears that thereafter notice under section 9 of the Act was served on 28.11.1983 and the land owners/claimants demanded price at Rs. 60 per Sq. Yard. The Land Acquisition Officer passed the award on 20.05.1986 and awarded compensation at Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. 4.18 per Sq. Mtrs.). He also awarded statutory benefit of the interest at the rate of 12 percent from the date of taking over the possession, the solatium at the rate of 30 percent and further interest at the rate of 9 percent for the first year and 15 percent for the subsequent year. Land owners / appellants were not satisfied with the compensation and therefore they raised dispute which ultimately came to be referred to the reference court for adjudication in Reference Application No. 13 of 1986.

(3.) The reference court after adjudication found that the claimants have produced the copy of the sale-deed without examination of the purchaser, and the seller of those sale-deeds and ultimately concluded that the claimants have not produced any sufficient evidence to establish that the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under section 4 was higher and therefore has dismissed the reference vide judgement dated 28.02.1996. It is under these circumstances the present appeal before this court.