STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. CHANDRAKANT MANGILAL SAMDADIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of First Appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment and order. As some of the Appeals pertain to jurisdiction of learned Single Judge, an order dated 16 th July, 2012 has been passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice assigning these Appeals to this Court. These Appeals consist of two groups. One group of the Appeals is First Appeal No.699 of 2002 alongwith the First Appeal Nos.1053 of 2009 to 1056 of 2009. In these Appeals, the challenge is to the judgment and award dated 21 st December, 2000 passed by the learned Joint District Judge in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.264 of 1993 to 267 of 1993. The remaining Appeals out of this group of First Appeals arise out of a common judgment and award dated 30 th April, 2001 in Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 213 of 1994 to 232 of 1994, 128 of 1995, 129 of 1995, 72 of 1996 and 28 of 2001. All the aforesaid references are under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). FACTS OF GROUP I

(2.) The lands subject matter of the first group of First Appeals being First Appeal No.699 of 2002 and First Appeal Nos.1053 of 2009 to 1056 of 2009 are situated at MaleDumale, Taluka Dindori, District Nashik. The lands were notified under a Notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act which was published in Government Gazette dated 4 th January, 1990. The purpose of acquisition was construction of the Punegaon Dam. The acquired lands subject matter of the said References are the agricultural lands. The awards under Section 11 of the said Act were made on 23 rd January, 1993. While offering compensation by the award under Section 11 of the said Act, the Special Land Acquisition Officer divided the acquired lands into four categories viz. JirayatI, JirayatII, JirayatIII and JirayatIV. The market value offered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer for the said categories is as under:

(3.) The learned Trial Judge did not grant any enhanced compensation on account of trees/orchards, wells and structures. The learned Judge observed that as far as the valuation of Pot kharaba land at Rs.200/ Per Hectare made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is concerned, none of the Claimants have either pleaded or proved that the said rate was inadequate. The learned Judge granted statutory benefits under Section 23(1A) and Section 23(2) of the said Act. The learned Judge also granted statutory benefit under Section 28 of the said Act. However, the benefit of interest under Section 28 was granted only on the component of excess land value and not on the other two components under Section 23(2) and Section 23(1A) of the said Act. The market value was fixed on the basis of the sale instance of the Sale Deed dated 9 th June, 1988 (Exhibit49) in respect of the lands bearing Gat No.161 from the same village. The market value reflected from the sale instance was also approximately Rs.1,15,800/ for BagayatIII land. Considering the fact that the relevant date for determination of the market value was 4 th January, 1990, the 15% escalation was given and, therefore, the market value of BagayatIII land was arrived at Rs.1,33,170/ Per Hectare which was rounded off to Rs.1,33,000/ Per Hectare. The Special Land Acquisition Officer while determining the market value of various categories of the lands had added Rs.2,000/ Per Hectare for arriving at the market value of immediately next higher category of the acquired lands. Accordingly, the market value of various categories of Jirayat and Bagayat lands was fixed by adding Rs.2000/ per Hectare. The market value of Bagayat I lands was fixed at 1 and 1/2 times the rate of JirayatI lands. The Reference Court by the impugned judgments and awards proceeded to fix the following rates of market value.