1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 209 OF 1992 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's Orders Mr. A.N. Kakde, Advocate for appellant. Mrs. R.K.Ladda, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. ............................... CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 19/11/2010 PER COURT : 1. This is an Appeal filed by the original claimant. 2. The land of the present appellant admeasuring 4 Hectors 28 R. situated at village Walkheda is acquired for Walkheda Percolation Tank. The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act ( For short, ‘ said Act ’ ) was issued on 6/12/1986. The Special Land Acquisition Officer ( For short, ‘ S.L.A.O. ’ ) has awarded compensation of Rs. 32,829/- for the acquired land. The claimant being dis-satisfied with the amount of compensation, preferred Appeal before the Reference Court claiming compensation of Rs. 7,000/- per Acre. The Reference Court dismissed the Reference. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant has filed the present Appeal. 2 3. Mr. Kakde, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the S.L.A.O. had awarded very meagre amount of compensation. Even in the year 1986, the value of the land was about Rs. 7,000/- per Acre, whereas the S.L.A.O. has awarded compensation only @ Rs. 3,000/- per Acre. The learned counsel further submitted that the oral evidence has been led to show the price of the land was in the range of Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- per Acre. Witness from the Sub Registrar’s office was also examined, who has given the valuation of the lands at which the stamp duty was recovered. The said evidence should have been considered by the Reference Court. 4. Per contra, Mrs. R.K.Ladda, the learned Assistant Govt. Pleader contended that not a single sale transaction is placed on record to substantiate the contention of the appellant. More over, the witness from the Sub Registrar’s office has led evidence in respect of assessment of Rs. 1.25 and Rs. 1.26. But no evidence was led in respect of land for assessment of Rs. 1.16. 5. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, I have gone through the Judgment and Award passed by the Reference Court and the record and proceedings. 6. It is an admitted position that not a single sale transaction has been placed on record by the claimants. There is no evidence to conclude that 3 the price of the land acquired was about Rs. 7,000/- per Acre. Even the evidence of a person from the Sub Registrar’s office does not substantiate the case of the present appellant in as much as he has not stated anything about the valuation of the land, whose assessment is Rs. 1.16. If the valuation as stated by the person from the Sub Registrar’s office is considered, he has stated that for the land having assessment of Rs. 1.25, the valuation was Rs. 16,500/- per Hector and the land having assessment of Rs. 1.26 was valued for stamp duty at Rs. 19,000/- per Hector. The valuation of Rs. 2,500/- was less for land having assessment of Rs. 1.25 from the land having assessment of Rs. 1.26. In the present case, the assessment is much less i.e. it is only Rs. 1.16. Even that evidence is of no help to the present appellant. 7. As no evidence has been produced regarding the market value of the land on the date of notification of Section 4 of the said Act, no fault can be found in the Judgment of the Reference Court rejecting the Reference. 8. In light of the above, the First Appeal is dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA ] JUDGE knp/FA 209.92