STATE OF GOA Vs. RAMABAI P NADKARNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Appeal and the Cross Objections, arise out of the Judgment and Order dated 18.03.2000, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Panaji. By the said Judgment and Order, the learned Judge was pleased to allow the reference and granted enhancement at the rate of Rs.18/- per square metre. THE State has challenged the said enhancement granted. In so far as the Cross Objections are concerned, the Respondent herein has filed the Cross Objections aggrieved by the fact that deduction of 50% has been made from the sale price mentioned in the Sale Deed which has been relied upon by the Respondent being exhibit Aw.1/C. THE contention of the Respondent is that the market rate should have been Rs.60/- per square metre. THE land in question has been acquired for the construction of right Bank Main Canal of Anjuna Bridge at Poriem Village. THE Land Acquisition Officer, had awarded compensation at Rs.2/- per square metre. Not satisfied with the said compensation, the Respondent herein, had sought a reference to be made to the Court under Section 18 of the said Act. Accordingly, the Collector had made a reference which came to be numbered as Land Acquisition Case no. 11/1989. THE reference Court framed the following issue: Whether the applicant proves that she is entitled for price of land acquired at the rate of 60/- per square metre. Consequently, the enhanced value to a sum of Rs.10,56,000/-

(2.) The reference Court, as indicated above, held that the Respondent would be entitled to enhancement at the rate of Rs.18/- per square metre and, consequently, the statutory benefits would be paid on the amount calculated at the said rate. In support of his case, the Respondent examined her Power of Attorney Shri Prabhakar Nadkarni as Aw.1, one expert/valuer Prabhakar G. Navelkar as Aw.2 and Minguel Fernandes, as Aw.3, the purchaser of the Sale Deed Exhibit Aw.1/B. THE Appellant in support of its case, examined one witness Mr. P. M. Reddy and produced the valuation report exhibit Rw.1/A and Form nos. I and XIV, exhibit Rw.1/B. On behalf of the Respondent, reliance was placed on the Sale Deed dated 29.07.1984, exhibit Aw.1/C and Sale Deed dated 12.08.1985, exhibit Aw.1/D.

(3.) In so far as the Cross Objections are concerned, the claim of the Respondent-original claimant is Rs.60/- per square metre. However, in the teeth of the documentary evidence which is on record in the form of the Sale Deeds produced by the Respondent himself, that too in respect of developed plots, there cannot be any enhancement to the extent as claimed by the Respondent. It is sought to be contented by Shri Ramani, the learned Counsel for the Respondent/Original claimant, that the deduction of 50% from the rate of Rs.36/-, which is mentioned in the Sale Deed at Exhibit Aw.1/C, is on the higher side. Considering the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in respect of the deductions to be made on the basis of peculiar features like location, frontage, development, etc., the deduction of 50% in view of the fact that the land in question was a huge tract admeasuring 17600 square metres, having cashew growth, cannot be said to be unjustified.