SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. CELIA PEREIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants being aggrieved by the Award dated 28.1.2000 passed by the Addl. District Judge, South Goa, Margao in Land Acquisition Case No.18/96, have filed the present appeal. The reference Court has enhanced the compensation in respect of the acquired land bearing Survey No.14/8 (part) from Rs.4/- to Rs.99/- per sq. metre.

(2.) NOTIFICATION dated 25.8.1994 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter, referred to as The Act') for acquisition of an area of 22,225 sq. metres for Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., was issued. An area of 275 sq. metres of Survey No.14/8 (part) of Cortalim Village, belonging to the respondents was part of the acquired land. The Land Acquisition Officer made his Award on 25.8.1995, fixing the compensation of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.4/- per sq. metre. Applicants sought reference under Section 18 of The Act, claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.750/- per sq. metre. The respondents examined two witnesses, namely Antonio P.M. Furtado, respondent No.2 (AW.1) and Peter D'Souza (AW.2). The respondent No.2 herein produced two sale deed and two awards. One of the Awards was in respect of the part of the remaining portion of the same property, which was acquired in the year 1991 and belonging to the respondents. The reference Court relying upon the said Award fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.99/- per sq. metre. In respect of the remaining part of the acquired land bearing Survey No.14/8 which was acquired in the year 1991, the reference Court had granted Rs.76/- per sq. metre in Land Acquisition Case No.390/95. By Award dated 29.1.1999, the reference Court granting increase of 10 % per year, fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.99/- per sq. metre, since the present acquisition was in the year 1994 i.e. after three years.

(3.) MR. Afonso, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that there is absolutely no evidence led by the respondent that the acquired land and the land involved in the Land Acquisition Case No.390/95 which was acquired in the year 1991 are similar in nature. The learned Counsel further submitted that the reference Court was not justified in placing the reliance on the Judgment passed by the reference in Land Acquisition Case No.390/1995 in the absence of any evidence being led that the land involved in that case and in the present case are similar in nature. The learned Counsel further submitted that the respondents having not led any evidence about increase of 10% every year in land prices in Cortalim Village, the reference Court could not have granted increase of 10% every year.