MAHESH DATTARAM KUVELKAR Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Appeals are filed challenging the Judgment and Award of the Reference Court dated 7.12.1998 in reference applications under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act. The said applications were numbered as LAC Nos. 151/93 and 152/93. In both the aforesaid LAC's reliance was placed on the Award of the reference Court in LAC No.387 of 81, involving a land covered by the same notification. The above Appeals also involve common facts as reliance was sought to be placed in LAC No.152 of 93 on the Award passed in LAC No.151 of 93. They are therefore heard and dealt with together.

(2.) The lands of the Appellants abovenamed were notified under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 17.11.1971 and were part of the total land admeasuring 23,44,750 square metres of Salaulim Village, which were to be acquired for the Salaulim Irrigation project. The lands of the Appellant in FA No.25 of 2000 which were acquired were plot No. 36 admeasuring 89500 square metres and plot No.49-A admeasuring 1600 square metres. The lands of the Appellant in First Appeal No. 34 of 2000 were out of the larger area of 14,36,456 square metres of Kurdi Village being plot no.360 admeasuring 1,37,400 square metres, Plot No. 364 admeasuring 3800 square metres, plot No.366 admeasuring 3000 square metres and plot No.367 admeasuring 2600 square metres. However, the application under Section 28A was only in respect of plot Nos. 360 and 365. Though each of the Appellants abovenamed had received the compensation under protest, they did not file any application for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The land of one Shri Narendra Nadkarni was also notified along with the lands of the Appellants abovenamed and in respect of which land and the lands of the Appellants the Award was common. The said Shri Narendra Nadkarni had filed a reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, which gave rise to Land Acquisition Case No. 387 of 1981 in which reference application the learned District Judge enhanced the market rate of land and trees as under :- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_149_TLMHH0_2010Html1.htm</FRM> It is on the basis of the Award in Narendra Nadkarni's case by the Reference Court that the Appellants abovenamed claimed re-determination of the amount of compensation awarded to them by invoking Section 28-A of the said Act. In so far as the Appellant in First Appeal No.25/2000 is concerned, the application for re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A came to be numbered as LAC No. SLAO/SIP/21-II/7/91-92. In the said case an Award came to be passed and the SLAO had awarded the market rate of Rs.1/- per sq.mt. for the entire acquired land of plot Nos. 36 and 49-A, Rs.250/- each for 90 coconut trees and Rs.800/- for one jackfruit tree. The SLAO also granted 30% solatium charges on the total of the above compensation granted under Section 28-A as also 9% interest for first year and 15% interest for subsequent period on the said sum total. In so far as the Appellant in First Appeal No. 34/2000 is concerned, he was awarded market rate of Rs.1/- per square metre for the entire acquired land of plot No.360 and Rs.4/- per square metre for plot Nos. 364, 366 and 367 and Rs.250/- each for 120 coconut trees, Rs.100/- each for 101 coconut plants and Rs.800/- each for five jackfruit trees. The statutory compensation awarded was the same as in First Appeal No.25/2000. Being dissatisfied with the Award passed by the SLAO under Section 28-A, the Appellants abovenamed made an application under Section 28-A (3) of the said Act which gave rise to the present reference cases being LAC Nos.151/93 and 152/93. In so far as the Appellant in First Appeal No.25/2000 is concerned, the Appellant claimed compensation for an area of 99,440 square metres for which area according to the Appellant he has not been compensated as compensation has been paid by the SLAO only for an area of 91,100 square metres. He claimed the rate of Rs.6/- per square metre for the entire area of 99,440 square metres. The Appellant further claimed an amount of Rs.1000/- for each of his 16 mango trees, Rs.150/- for each of his 377 cashew trees, and Rs.1000/- for each of his 17 guava trees. He further claimed an amount of Rs.8000/- as forest value. The Appellant in FA No.34/2000 claimed an amount of Rs.1000/- for each of his four mango trees and Rs.150/- each towards fruit value of his 319 cashew trees. Both the Appellants also claimed 30% solatium on the value of the trees awarded under Section 28-A at Rs.23,300/-, interest at 9% from 23.2.1974 to 22.2.1975 and at the rate of 15% from 23.2.1975 to 10.7.1992. In addition to the above, both the Appellants also claimed 12% additional amount on market value of the land under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, from the date of Section 4 Notification till the date of the original Award.

(3.) The Reference Court in LAC No.151/93 framed the following issues for consideration :