PRABHAKAR SAKHARAM PATNEKAR Vs. DY. COLLECTOR (L.A)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the Award passed by the learned Ad -hoc District Judge, Fast Track Court - 3, Mapusa in Land Acquisition Case No.19/2006 in reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(2.) THE relevant facts are: The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on 7/4/2003 for acquisition of various lands including the land which is the subject matter of the present appeal. The Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.30/ - per sq.metre. The appellant being dis -satisfied had filed reference and claimed that he is entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.305/ - per sq.metre. The Reference Court considered the matter and rejected the claim of the appellant mainly on the ground that the acquired land is within the set back area of the State Highway and unfit for construction. In view of this, the Reference Court did not consider the sale instances in respect of the properties which according to the appellant were adjacent to the acquired land.

(3.) SHRI Parsekar, learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Reference Court has committed an error in not considering the evidence brought on the record by the appellant and by not considering the sale deeds produced by the appellant to substantiate his claim. The learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the reasons given by the Reference Court for rejecting the claim as made by the appellant is unsustainable in law inasmuch as the enhanced compensation could not have been rejected only on the ground that the acquired land is within the setback area of the State Highway and is not fit for construction. In support of his submission he has relied on the judgment in the case of " State of Goa and Another Vs. Gopal Baburao Gaudo and Others " (2009) 10 SCC 686 and more specifically paragraphs 3,4,5 and 6, which read thus: