STATE TO GOA Vs. NEELESHWAR ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS appeal is against judgment in Special Civil Suit No. 9/96 decreeing the respondent-plaintiff's claim for damages and compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- for loss suffered on account of carrying on canal work after acquisition of the land. In the acquisition, a part of the respondents' property i.e. Office of Stone Crushing Unit was also acquired.

(3.) MR. Vahidullah, the learned A.G.A., rightly contended that the judgment does not give reason for arriving at a figure of Rs. 2,50,000/- in that the figure of the loss allegedly sustained by the respondent have not been dealt with while arriving at the figure of Rs.2,50,000/-. This submission is correct. However, it appears that the learned counsel for the respondent stated before the trial Court that the compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,83,000/- would be sufficient to meet the loss. This figure was not accepted by the trial Court in its entirety and was further reduced to Rs. 2,50,000/-. Thus, it would not be possible to interfere in the judgment on this count. There is sufficient evidence on record to arrive at a conclusion hat the respondent may have suffered a loss of Rs.2,50,000/- having regard to the rates of finished products and raw material stated by respondent and his Supervisor in the witness box, which has not been challenged. It may not have been possible to support the findings if the amount awarded was more than the amount for which there is evidence. Here, the amount awarded is less than the amount for which there is evidence. Mr.Vahidullah, the learned A. G. A. for the appellant, is not in a position to point out any evidence contrary to the findings recorded by the trial Court on this aspect.