STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ARVIND RAMRAO BHALERAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This appeal arises from the award dated 9th April 1980 passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 7 of 1977. By a notification under section 4 of the Land acquisition Act 1894, hereinafter called as the said Act on 18-8-1971 an area of 17 acres and 7 gunthas of Sy. No. 487/2 situated at Parbhani belonging to the respondent herein was sought to be acquired for the purpose of the marathwada Agricultural University Extension Project. The land Acquisition Officer classified the land into two classes, one as dry land and other as irrigated land, offering compensation at the rate of Rs. 1360/- per acre in relation to dry land and Rs. 2400/- per acre in relation to irrigated lands; besides a sum of Rs. 500/- towards well, and Rs. 500/- towards standing trees. Being aggrieved by the said amount of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition officer, the respondent herein preferred a Reference application under section 18 of the said Act for enhanced compensation and the Reference Court by the impugned award after hearing the parties enhanced the compensation to the tune of rs. 15,000/- per acre irrespective of the fact whether it is dry or irrigated land.

(2.) THE appellants have challenged the impugned award on the ground that the enhancement has been granted on the basis of sale instances related to the period much after the issuance of the notification and therefore it was not proper for the Reference Court nor was justified in granting enhancement of compensation on the basis of such sale instances. Secondly that the sale instances relied upon are in relation to small plots whereas the area acquired is large chunk of the land and, therefore, considering law laid down by the Apex Court it was not permissible for the reference Court to apply the market value in relation to small plots to the bigger area. Thirdly the Reference Court could not have relied upon the oral testimony of the respondent in absence of documentary evidence for granting the compensation in relation to income from the land acquired.

(3.) UPON hearing the learned advocates for the parties and on perusal of records, the point which arises for the consideration in the matter is that whether the Reference court was justified in enhancing the compensation at the rate it has enhanced considering the materials on record.