BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Vs. SAROJANI UTTAMRAO NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) First Appeal No.589 of 2007 has been preferred by the Acquiring Body seeking to challenge the judgment of the Reference Court in L.A.C. No.108 of 2000 whereby the Reference Court has awarded compensation for Plot Nos.5 to 7 and 15 to 17 from Survey No.34 of Mouza Mahagaon, Tahsil Mahagaon, District Yavatmal at the rate of Rs.40/- per square foot.

(2.) Various lands were sought to be acquired for construction of office building of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the said Act') was issued on 29.08.1996. By award dated 31.03.1998, the Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation at the rate of Rs.23.23 Paise per square foot for land totally admeasuring 20000 square feet consisting of Plot Nos.5 to 7 and 15 to 17. The claimants not being satisfied with the amount of compensation as awarded filed proceedings under Section 18 of the said Act. The Reference Court after considering the evidence on record enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.40/- per square foot. Being aggrieved by that adjudication, the present appeal has been filed. The claimants have filed C.A.O. 158 of 2019 praying for condonation of delay in filing cross-objections for challenging the judgment of the Reference Court. In the said application, it has been stated that though the claimants were represented by their counsel since October-2007 in the aforesaid appeal, the cross-objections could not be filed due to nonavailability of funds. After making that arrangement, the cross-objections came to be filed on 21.01.2019.

(3.) Shri S.S. Bhalerao, learned counsel for the appellant in support of the appeal submitted that enhancement in the amount of compensation as awarded by the Reference Court was without appreciating the evidence on record. It is submitted that there were various sale instances on record out of which only the sale instances at Exhibits 64, 65 and 76 pertained to the period prior to issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the said Act. Most of the other sale instances were after issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the said Act. The Reference Court despite noticing that the maximum sale price of plots in the year 1996 was at the rate of Rs.24/- per square foot enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs.40/- per square foot. The sale instances were of smaller pieces of land while the acquired land was admeasuring 20000 square feet. The evidence on record indicated that the acquired plots were from the residential area and were not touching the highway on the Eastern side. The evidence indicated that on the northern side of the acquired lands, there were agricultural fields. The enhancement as granted by the Reference Court was not justified in view of the nature of evidence on record. He also referred to the crossexamination of various witnesses examined by the claimants to indicate that the enhancement as granted was on a higher side. Reference as made by the Court to the sale instances at Exhibits 23, 29 and 31 did not warrant enhancement as granted. He placed reliance on the decisions in Land Acquisition Officer, Kammarapally Village, Nizamabad District, A.P. Versus Nookala Rajamallu & Others, 2003 12 SCC 334 and Land Acquisition Officer & Sub-Collector, Gadwal Versus Sreelatha Bhoopal (Smt) & Another, 1997 9 SCC 628 to submit that the material on record did not support the increase in the amount of compensation as granted by the Reference Court.