LAWS(BOM)-2020-12-460

NARESH SAMIRMAL KOTECHA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On December 22, 2020
Naresh Samirmal Kotecha Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals are filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the said Act') challenging the judgment of the reference Court dated 09.02.2011 in Land Acquisition Case No.606/2005, they are being decided together by this common judgment.

(2.) Land Gat No. 148 ad-measuring 6 H 5 R situated at village Barad, Tq. Babhulgaon, and District-Yavatmal was acquired for the purpose of the Bembla River Project. Notification u/s 4 of the said Act is dated 24.7.2003. The Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation for land at the rate of Rs.25,445/- per hectare, Rs.4,19,500/- was awarded for 500 awala trees, Rs.1,77,000/- for 500 custard apple trees and Rs.6,98,600/- for 1400 ber trees. The claimant filed reference u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation. The reference Court enhanced compensation for fruit-bearing trees thereby awarding Rs.3,070/- per awala tree, Rs.3,160/- per ber tree and Rs.2,000/- per custard apple tree. The reference Court, however, rejected the claim for agricultural land ad-measuring 6 H 5 R. This judgment is under challenge in both these appeals.

(3.) In First Appeal No.140/2012 filed by the claimant, Shri Anand Joshi, the learned advocate claimed that the rejection of claim for compensation towards the land is erroneous on the part of the reference Court. It is further argued that the sale instances which were brought on record vide Exhs.23 and 24, were not properly considered by the reference Court. The claim of Rs.5 Lacs per hectare ought to have been awarded by the reference Court taking into consideration the sale instances placed on record by the claimant. The learned advocate, therefore, claimed that the reference filed u/s 18 of the said Act ought to have been allowed by the reference Court by awarding value of land at the rate of Rs.13,35,000/-. The reference Court has further erred in not awarding value of the fruit-bearing trees as per the valuation report, therefore, claims that the additional compensation of Rs.2,03,00,000/- needs to be given towards the fruit-bearing trees. For well and pipe line, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-. In support of the claim, the claimant has placed sufficient material on record before the reference Court, hence the appeal of the claimant deserves to be allowed. In support of his submissions, the learned advocate relied upon Pramilabai wd/o Manguji Ade and others .vs. State of Maharashtra and another, reported in 2018 (3) Mh.L.J. 787 and the judgment of learned Single Judge at Nagpur in First Appeal No. 469 of 2012 (Sau. Ushabai Manikrao Baradkar ..Vrs.. State of Maharashtra and other).