✦ Bombay High Court · 17 Jul 2008

Shri Laxman Mahadu Nigrose v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Alibag

APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL No. 118 of 1991D B BHOSALE, B H MARLAPALLE6 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 1010. First Appeal No.614 of 1991 filed by the State Government stands dismissed. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)

Judgment

1.

Both these Appeals arise from the very same Award passed learned Civil Judge, Senior Division Raigad 17/10/1989 Land Acquisition Reference No.67

1987. First Appeal No.118 1991 claimant whereas First Appeal 2 No.614 1991 State Maharashtra and, therefore, both these appeals are being decided by a common judgment.

2.

The agricultural land located in Gat No.79 Hissa No.15 Gat No.68 Hissa No.1 village Barvai, Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad acquisition notification issued Section 4 Land Acquisitions Act, 1894 ("the Act" short) 13/12/1984 ownership claimant admeasuring 17900 sq. mtrs. sought acquired notification. Declaration Section 6 Act published 13/6/1985 Section 11 Act declared 23/9/1985 Land Acquisition Officer. He market Rs.2.50 square 16000 sq.mtrs. and 2 paise per sq.mtr. for the balance area.

3.

Being dissatisfied with the market value fixed Special Land Acquisition Officer, claimant submitted application Section 18 enhancement compensation which Act referred Collector learned Civil Judge, 3 Senior Division Raigad proceedings registered LAR No.67

1987. After hearing parties consideration reference, Court pleased market admeasuring 17900 Rs.35 square meter. addition reference Court benefit In severance respect remaining admeasuring 5300 square metres awarding market i.e. Rs.35 square metre. addition solatium 30 % market In provided Section 23(2) Act compensation 12% provided Section 23(1A) Act claimant. Interest at the rate of 9 % per annum has also been granted.

4.

The claimant is not satisfied with the market Rs.35/- square claims Rs.50/- square metre, having regards potential subject development surrounding areas. The claimant claims interest Section 28 properly granted computed Reference Court. Whereas State Government appeal raised 4 grounds viz. market Rs.35/- square higher claimant entitled compensation remaining area of 5300 sq.mtrs which was not acquired under the notification dated 13/12/1984.

During the course of arguments Mr.Pai, the learned counsel claimant brought notice First Appeal 104 55 1991 notification 13/12/1984 Gat No. viz. Gat No.79 decided Single Bench Court 30/6/2008. A judgment placed before learned Single Judge recorded claimants’ reliance passed Reference Court respect acquisition earlier notification 4/9/1982 market Land Acquisition Officer Rs.35/- square metre. Even impugned referred learned Civil Judge, Senior Division acquisition notification 4/9/1982. The learned Single Judge applied principle 12 increase taking recourse scheme Section 23(1A) Act market 5 Rs.45/- sq.mtr. instead Rs.35/- sq.mtr. We reason a different view, instant appeals the very same notification and also the land in the very same gat number.

6.

Mr.Patil, the learned AGP submitted that the remaining 5300 sq.mtrs. considered Reference Court granting compensation covered acquisition. He, therefore, prayed claimants entitled compensation respect remaining 5300 sq.mtrs rate. Mr.Pai, learned counsel claimants invited attention operative Reference Court State entitled acquire remaining claimant. Mr.Pai submitted possession subsequently State Government remaining claimants initiated separate proceedings for compensation or for enhancement of compensation.

7.

Mr.Pai, on instructions, has furnished an 6 undertaking before proceedings claiming additional compensation enhancement compensation respect balance 5300 sq.mtrs. initiated and/or pending before Reference Court authority, proceedings withdrawn forthwith. He further furnished undertaking claimants additional compensation respect plot area admeasuring 5300 sq.mtrs. in any other proceedings. The undertaking is noted and accepted.

8.

We, therefore, hold that the market value of subject deserves Rs.45/- sq.mtrs. consequently claimant entitled for the benefit of solatium at 30 per cent on the market value.

9.

Hence First Appeal No.118 of 1991 is partly allowed the market subject Rs.45/- sq.mtr. Consequently claimant entitled benefit solatium the market Section 23(2) Act. The claimant entitled compensation Section 23(1A) Act. It 30 further directed claimant 7 interest Section 28 Act enhanced amount. The compensation additional benefits available claimant + respect i.e. 17900 sq.mtrs. 5300 sq.mtrs. The arrears arising enhanced compensation State Government within a period of twelve weeks from today.

9. The learned AGP to forward a copy of this order to the concerned Land Acquisition Officer / Collector and the Government Pleader.

10.

First Appeal No.614 of 1991 filed by the State Government stands dismissed. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.)

(B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Land Acquisitions Act, 1894 — s. 4.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 17 Jul 2008. The bench was D B BHOSALE, B H MARLAPALLE.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL No. 118 of 1991). ← Search more judgments