THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. Vs. NAMDEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issues involved in First Appeal No.651 of 1994 and Cross Objection No.2 of 2015 are identical and the correctness of the judgment of the reference Court is questioned in both, they are heard together and are decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The land of the claimant was situated on the outskirts of village Mandwa i.e. Mandwa Shivar or Gaothan. Out of the 10 Hectares of land belonging to the claimant, 5 Hectares was acquired by the State of Maharashtra for rehabilitation of the landholders of Laighwan, by the Section 4 notification, dated 12.04.1987. The Award was passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31.01.1990. The Special Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation to the claimant at the rate of Rs.14,500/ per Hectare. For the seven mango trees that were standing on the acquired land, the Special Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation of Rs.15,140/. Being aggrieved by the grant of meager compensation, the claimant filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 22.02.1990. By the said application, the claimant sought a sum of Rs.50,000/ per Acre for the acquired land and also claimed higher compensation for the trees. By an amendment application that was filed more than three years later, the claimant sought much higher compensation at the rate of Rs.15/ per square foot. It was stated by the claimant in the amendment application that he had undervalued the land and had made a lesser claim for avoiding the Court fees. The said amendment application, though opposed by the State Government, was allowed by the reference Court. The reference Court after permitting the parties to tender evidence, by the judgment dated 30.07.1994, enhanced the compensation manifold, and granted it at the rate of Rs.6,00,000/ per Hectare. The judgment of the reference Court is challenged by the State Government in the instant appeal. The crossobjection is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation.

(3.) Ms Udeshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the State, submitted that the reference Court committed a serious error in allowing the amendment application. It is stated that the claimant had initially made a claim for compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/ per acre and by the amendment, the claimant claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.15/ per square foot. It is submitted that it is stated in the application that he had undervalued the land and made a meager claim for avoiding Court fees and the statement stands falsified by the crossexamination of the claimant. It is stated that the claimant had clearly admitted in his crossexamination that he had instructed his advocate to claim compensation at the rate of Rs.15/ per square foot but, he is not aware as to why the advocate did not make a claim at that rate. It is stated that the two versions of the claimant, one in the amendment application and the other in his crossexamination clearly show that the claimant had not undervalued the claim and had rightly sought compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/ per acre, though that was also on a higher side. It is stated that for the reasons best known to the claimant, the claimant had illegally sought the enhancement of the compensation to such a great extent. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the claimant is a literate person having a teaching experience of nearly 28 years and, hence, it cannot be believed that the claimant had undervalued the land with a view to avoid the Court fees. It is stated that the judgment in the case of Ambya Kalya Mhatre (dead) through LRs. & Others Versus State of Maharashtra, 2012 1 MhLJ 9 cannot be made applicable to the facts of this case and the reference Court ought to have rejected the amendment application. It is stated that the claimant has illegally claimed exorbitant compensation though he was surely aware of the actual market price of the acquired land, which was much lesser than claimed, on the date of issuance of the Section 4 notification.