SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Vs. PRATAPSINGH SHOORJI VALLABHDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present reference is filed by the SLAO under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land sought to be acquired is in respect of area admeasuring about 1982 sq. mts situated at Kanjurmarg, bombay. The public purpose for which the said land is proposed to be acquired is jogeshwari-Vikhroli Link Road. On 18-3-1995 a notification was issued under section 126 (2) of the MRTP Act, 1966 and same was published in the government Gazette on 26-6-1975. The land in question forms part of CTS No. 122 (pt) is more particularly located on the eastern side of Central Railway Line between Kanjurmarg Railway Station and Vikhroli Railway station. On 13-3-1975 an award was passed under section 11 of the LA Act and the SLAO has determined the value of the land at Rs. 20/- per sq. mts after giving various other allowances such as distance and valuation of structure and ultimately an award has been passed in favour of the Claimants for a sum of Rs. 8,00,189. 95/-, The claimant being dissatisfied by the said award on 31-6-1975 made an application for enhancement of the compensation under section 18 of the Act pursuant thereto the SLAO has made the present reference on 9-9-1981 in this Court seeking a decision by this Court under section 18 of the LA Act on the request of the claimants for enhancement of the said valuation.

(2.) IN the present land acquisition reference two witnesses are examined by the claimant, one is Aditya Pratap Singh who is the son of claimant No. 1 and constituted attorney of claimant No. 1 to 3 and another Mr. Vinit Ramanlal Shah, expert valuer in support of his valuation report dated 28-1-1994. The learned counsel appearing for the SLAO has cross-examined the said witness but has not produced any witness on their behalf. Insofar as oral evidence is concerned the first witness namely Aditya P. Singh has identified the said land and has produced documents in the form of order and plan of the said property. He has deposed that the said land was acquired for public purpose for construction of jogeshwari-Vikhroli link road. He has also deposed that pursuant to the said acquisition the claimant was awarded compensation of Rs. 34,198. 10/- (including 15% solatium) at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. mtr. He has stated in the evidence in examination-in-chief that he was looking after the said land and he has visited the same and thus he is aware of the location and condition of the said land. According to him the said land was vacant in 1975. According to him the said land was a levelled land and that prior to taking over possession he had visited the land. He has identified the said land in the plan. In his examination-in-chief he has stated that the land was at a distance of 100 mts. from Kanjurmarg railway Station and 300 mts from Vikhroli Railway Station. He has further stated that the said land was also at a distance of 100 mts from LBS Marg which is one of the major arterial road. He has been cross-examined by SLAO and in his cross-examination he has admitted that the land which was acquired was a barren land and was not put to any use at the time of acquisition in 1975. He has also deposed that the land was a grassy land. He has deposed that the surrounding area of the land which was a government land was occupied by hutments. He has also admitted in the cross-examination that there is no development on the acquired land or surrounding areas of the said land. He has however deposed that the land is not a residential land and was closely located to Kanjurmarg Railway station. In his cross-examination he has also expressed his inability to classify the acquired land for residential purposes but he has stated that the acquired land is located on the eastern side of the railway line. He has admitted in his crossexamination that the said land had no access and he has further admitted that there are no other comparable sale instances are available on the eastern side of the railway line. He has admitted that there was no income generated from the said land.

(3.) THE second witness which was examined was Vinit Ramanlal Shah a certified architect and valuer. In his affidavit in his examination-in-chief he has also filed a valuation report as well as the plan of the said acquired land. In his examination-in-chief he has deposed that he is a government approved valuer and has specialised in valuation of property both movables and immovables. He has also deposed that he has prepared the valuation report dated 20-1-1994 for a land under reference and according to him the value of the acquired land is much higher as mentioned in the valuation report. According to him the valuation specified in the award dated 31-3-1979 seeking award under the claim at Rs. 20/-is not appropriate and higher rate should be awarded. He has also admitted that the land is situated on the eastern side of Kanjurmarg Railway Station. In his evidence he has deposed that according to him the sale instances No. 1 and 15 which are proved before the SLAO are comparable sale instances in respect of the land under reference. According to him the sale instance No. 1 is comparable because the area of the said land and the sale instance No. 15 is approximately similar whereas sale instance No. 3 is of an area around 1215 sq. mtr. According to him by virtue of similarity of size sale instance No. 1 should be preferred to the sale instance No. 15. According to him the award of the SLAO is purpotedly wrong because the SLAO has adopted a wrong method of valuation of the average rate. According to the valuer Mr. Vinit R. Shah the sale instance in respect of each of the land must be separately considered and cannot be clubbed together and average rate arrived at such a method of valuation is erroneous. . . because each land differs in its size, shape and location and other amenities. According to him the principle of valuation of the land can never be based on the basis of average rate of large number of sale instances and therefore the award of the arbitrator insofar as it pertains to the determination of the average rate of interest is bad in law. He has thereafter proceeded by taking into consideration the rate specified of sale instance No. 1 as most comparable sale instances and has arrived at his own valuation as mentioned in his valuation report. According to him there are certain additions and deductions are to be granted in respect of the size and location of the said land. According to him after taking into consideration the allowances, the market rate of the acquired land should be around Rs. 63/- per sq. mts. excluding solatium and interest. According to him in his evidence he has further deposed that the said land has great potential of development because it was located close to Bombay Agra Road as well as close to the railway station.