1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 83 OF 1996 (Arising out of Land Acquisition Reference No. 229 of 1986) The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Metro Centre No.I, Panvel, Dist.Raigad. V/s. Smt.Rukminibai Shripatrao Meher ...Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 85 OF 1996 (Arising out of Land Acquisition Reference No. 225 of 1986) The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant V/s. Shri Manik Namdeo Bhalinge ...Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 87 OF 1996 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7772 OF 1996 (Arising out of Land Acquisition Reference No. 230 of 1986) The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant V/s. Shankar Vishnu Ramane ...Respondent .... Ms.S.P.Manchekar, AGP for the appellant-State. Mr.Kiran J. Kandpile, Advocate, for the respondent. .... CORAM : J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 8th September, 2009. P.C. 1. Though the respondents are different, all these 2 appeals can be disposed of by passing a common judgment, as the facts in all the appeals and the appellants are common. 2. The facts in brief are that a notification dated 3 rd February 1970 was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, for acquisition of several lands in Podi Panvel for establishment of new Satellite Town to be called New Bombay. Award No.189 was passed on 30 th September 1983. In each of these appeals, the land in question was a small plot of land which was already converted into non agricultural plot for residential purpose and the plot was situated in Podi Panvel. It was extended part of Panvel Municipal Council. The respondents whose plots were proposed to be acquired under the said notification, claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 30 per sq.mtrs., taking into consideration, the location of these plots, at a short distance from railway station, S.T.Bus Stand. I.T.I. and Industrial Estate as well as Matheran Road, which leads to a Hill Station. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ of Rs.10 per sq.mtrs. 3 Being dissatisfied, the claimant moved reference applications to the Collector and the reference application nos. 229 of 1986, 225 of 1986 & 230 of 1986 under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act were made to the District Court, Raigad. The Land Acquisition Officer filed written statement justifying the award of compensation @Rs.10/-per sq.mtr. All these petitions were finally disposed of by the judgment dated 30 th April 1994 by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad. Taking into consideration the evidence placed on record, the location of the spot as well as the view taken by this Court in First Appeal No. 754 of 1986, the reference court partly allowed the reference and the market value of the land @ Rs. 25/- per sq.mtr. and fixed the compensation accordingly. Being not satisfied, the State of Maharashtra has preferred the present appeals. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record and proceedings as well as impugned judgment. Only question which arise for my consideration is, whether the reference court was justified in determination of market value @ 4 Rs.25/- per sq.mtrs. 4. The record reveals that, in each of these cases, the plots in dispute were already converted into N.A. plot for residential purpose. In First Appeal No. 83 of 1986, the area of the plot was 614.65 sq.mtrs. and in First Appeal No. 85 of 1986, the area of the plot was 646.45 sq.mtrs., in First Appeal No. 87 of 1996, the area of the plot was 797.86. sq.mtrs. These plots were situated in Podi Panvel area, which was within the extended limits of Panvel Municipal Council. The Trial Court has noted that the plots in question were at distance of 1 K.M. from S.T.stand, 480 mtrs. from the Railway Station, and 1440 mtrs. from Bombay-Pune National Highway No.4. Jeevan Narayan Kulkarni was examined about the valuation of these property. As per his evidence, in view of the infrastructural facilities and the fact that these plots were already converted into N.A. for residential purpose, the value of the plots was Rs.30 per sq.mtrs. The reference court noted that in First Appeal No. 754 of 1986, this High Court had fixed 5 the market value of the lands between Rs.22 to 25 per sq.mtr. for the agricultural lands of Panvel considering the proximity to the National Highway No.4. The said Judgment of the High Court has been reported in Nama Padu Hudar and others Versus The State of Maharashtra, 1993(3) Bom.C.R. 54. By on that judgment, a large number of appeals were decided by the Division Bench of this Court. After considering the several aspects and evidence, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that the land in each area could be put in five different groups. The lands abutting the Bombay-Pune Highway were put in group-I and the price was fixed at Rs.25/- per sq.mtr. The lands, which were not abutting the Bombay-Pune Highway, but within a distance of 800 mtrs. from the highway were put in group II and the market value was fixed @ Rs.23/- per sq.mtrs. The lands which were abutting Kamothe-Thane Zilla Parishad but within 1200 mtrs. from Bombay-Pune Highway were put in group-III and price was fixed @ Rs.22/- per sq.mtrs. The lands which were within the distance of 800 to 2200 mtrs. from 6 Bombay-Pune Highway were put in group-IV-A and lands within a distance of 200 to 640 mtrs. from Zilla Parishad Road and Gaothan were put in group IV-B and for group IV-A and IV-B rate was fixed @ Rs.20/- per sq.mtr. 5. In the present cases, as the pointed out by both the learned counsel, the lands were situated at distance of 1440 sq.mtrs. from the Bombay-Pune National Highway and therefore, they could be put in group IV-A. This aspect was considered by the reference court. Taking into consideration that in the matters in Nama Padu Hudar and others Versus The State of Maharashtra, 1993(3) Bom.C.R. 54, all the lands were agricultural lands and in the present matters, the lands were the small plots already converted in N.A. for residential purpose, the reference court held that even though these plots were at the distance of 1400 to 1500 mtrs. away from the Highway, the price could be fixed @ Rs.25/- per sq.mtr. If these lands would be agricultural lands, in view of the decision of the Division Bench by this Court in Nama Padu Hudar and others Versus The State of 7 Maharashtra, 1993(3) Bom.C.R.54, price could have been fixed @ Rs.20/-per sq.mtr. But the distinguishing factor is that in these matters, the lands were already converted into N.A. and plots were already developed while the lands acquired in Nama Padu Hudar and others Versus The State of Maharashtra, 1993(3) Bom.C.R.54 were agriculture lands and were yet to be developed. In view of this, the reference court was justified in awarding compensation @ Rs.25/- per sq.mtr. Therefore, the award passed by the reference court needs no interference. 6. In view of the above circumstances, there is no merit in these appeals. Therefore, all these appeals stand dismissed. 7. As the appeal No.87 of 1996 is dismissed, the civil application No.7772 of 1996 does not survive and stands disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)