SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. RUI FERNANDES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellants challenge the legality of the judgment and Award dated 20-2-1999, passed by the Addl. District Judge, margao in Land Acquisition Case No. 126/95.

(2.) Notification dated 20-1-1992 under section 4 of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Act') was issued by the Government, acquiring large chunks of land for Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. An area of 8350 sq. metres bearing Survey No. 272/1 (part) of Cuncolim Village, Salcete taluka was acquired by the said Notification. The Special Land Acquisition officer made his Award on 6-5-1994 and awarded Rs. 4/- per sq. metre for an area of 8275 sq. metres and Rs. 2/- per sq. metre in respect of 75 sq. metres of nallah. The respondent being aggrieved by the Award made by the Special land Acquisition Officer, sought reference claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 100/- per sq. metres. In Land Acquisition Case No. 126/1995, the respondent examined two witnesses. He examined himself as A. W. 1 and the sub-Registrar of Margao Shri Pandharinath Bodke as A. W. 2. The appellants examined Shri Espiritto Furtado, as RW 1. The respondent during the course of evidence produced two sale deeds dated 23-8-1988. By one sale-deed which is at Exhibit AW 1/e an area of 428 sq. metres was sold for Rs. 12,840/- and by another sale-deed which is at Exhibit AW 1 /f, two plots admeasuring 382 and 422 sq. metres were sold for Rs. 24,240/- i. e. at the rate of Rs. 30/- per sq. metre. The appellants herein did not produce any documentary evidence. After considering the evidence led by the parties and the arguments advanced by both sides, the reference Court enhanced the compensation of the area of 8275 sq. metres of Rs. 40/- per sq. metres and in respect of the remaining part i. e. 75 sq. metres, maintained the compensation awarded by the Special land Acquisition Officer. The Reference Court relied upon the price of the land mentioned in the Sale Deeds as the market value of the said plots in the year 1988 and enhanced the same to Rs. 40/- per sq. metre by increasing the rate by 10% per year, to determine the market value of the acquired land.

(3.) Mr. Afonso, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the impugned judgment and Award given by the Reference Court deserves to be set aside since the Reference Court has committed illegality by not making any deductions while considering the market rate as on the date of section 4 Notification, for the development charges in respect of the acquired land. Mr. Afonso further submitted that the sale deeds were in respect of small plots of land and the area acquired by the notification was 8350 sq. metres and, therefore, it was necessary for the Reference Court to make appropriate deductions while fixing the market price of the acquired land. The learned Counsel further submitted that the Reference Court ought to have deducted 60% from the consideration mentioned in the sale-deed and after considering the deductions, the Reference Court could have fixed the com- pensation giving the necessary increase considering the fact that section 4 notification was issued after three years and four months from the date of execution of the said sale deeds. In support of his submissions that 60% deductions ought to have been made by the Reference Court, the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of (Madhusudan R. Mahambre v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (North) and another) , 2002 (6) bom. C. R. 163. The learned Counsel does not dispute that since the sale deeds are in respect of the same land, the consideration mentioned in the sale deeds could be the basis for determining the market price of the acquired land.