YESHWANT V.S. VERENKAR SHANTI NAGAR PONDAGOA SINCE DECEASED THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER PWD CELL ALTINHO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this appeal, the appellants take exception to the Judgment and Order dated 24.02.2000 passed by the Addl. District Judge, North Goa, Panaji, in Land Acquisition Case no.136/97, rejecting the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act ('The Act' for short).

(2.) THE Government of Goa issued Notification under Section 4 of the Act, acquiring lands for the public purposes, namely, the construction of a bypass to Ponda Town. The Notification was published on 14.11.1989. The land admeasuring 2378 square metres belonging to the appellant was part of the acquired land out of which an area of 930 square metres was paddy field and the remaining area of 1448 square metres was coconut grove. The appellants claimed Rs.300/- per sq. metre in respect of the acquired land. The Land Acquisition Officer passed the Award dated 15.03.1992 fixing the compensation at the rate of Rs.55/- per sq. metre in respect of the coconut grove and Rs.15/- per square metres in respect of the paddy field. The Land Acquisition Officer also awarded compensation in respect of the trees existing in the acquired land. Being aggrieved, the respondents sought reference and claimed Rs.300/- per square metre in respect of the acquired land and also claimed higher compensation in respect of the trees.

(3.) PER contra, Mr. Vahuidulla learned Addl. Government Advocate submitted that appellants had not led any evidence to prove that the sale deed land and the acquired land were similar. He further submitted that the claimant had not led any evidence that he wanted to change the acquired land which was agricultural land into non-agricultural land so as to make it fit for construction purpose. He submitted that the sale deed land cannot be said to be comparable to the acquired land, as such, the reference Court was perfectly justified in rejecting the reference. Mr. Vahuidulla further submitted that the sale deed plot was a developed plot which was converted into non-agricultural use and therefore no reliance can be placed on the said sale deed to fix the market rate of the acquired land.