1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO.30 OF 2005 1. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa KRCL, Amey Guest House, Davorlim Road, P.O. Navelim, Salcete-Goa. 2. The Chief Engineer, Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., Rawanfond, Margao, Goa. …. Appellants V/s 1. Ulhas Govind Bhagat 2. Mohan Govind Bhagat, Canacona, Goa. …. Respondents Mr. A.D. Bhobe, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. P.A. Kamat, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : N.A. BRITTO, J. DATE : 8th OCTOBER, 2010 JUDGMENT : Heard learned Counsel on behalf of both parties. 2. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 9/01/2004 of the learned Reference Court, Margao. Respondents' land was acquired by virtue of notification published on Gazette dated 27/06/1991. Land Acquisition Officer had awarded ` 9/- per square metre to the respondents' land of Survey No.190/18 and 2 190/19 of Nagorcem-Palolem Village. That has been enhanced to ` 21/- per square metre, by judgment dated 9/01/2004. 3. Counsel have brought to my notice the judgment of this Court dated 4/05/2005 in First Appeal No.132/2005 in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer & Anr. V/s. Premabai Vishwanath Naik Dessai. ` 19/- per square metre has been the compensation awarded by this Court in respect of Survey No.56/2 of the same village acquired by the same notification and for the same purpose. 4. In M/s. Printers House Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Mst. Saiyadan (deceased) by LR's & Ors. (1994 SC 1160), the Apex Court has held that: “If 'Comparable Sales Method of Valuation of land' is adopted for determining the market-value of an acquired plot of land, it generally holds good for determination of the market-value of several acquired plots of land if the acquisition of all such plots of land is made pursuant to the same preliminary Notification.” 5. In Bhim Singh and Ors. V/s. State of Haryana & Anr. (AIR 2003 SC 4382) the Apex Court has held that even otherwise, when compensation has already been fixed by the High Court in earlier 3 proceedings and when in one of such proceeding this Court has already approved the rate fixed then in view of their Lordships, the best method would be to look at the earlier judgments awarded. Therefore, the High Court could not be faulted for having fixed compensation on the basis of earlier judgments. 6. It is desirable that similar land in the same village acquired under the same notification be awarded the compensation in order to bring uniformity in awards. 7. Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed. The judgment of the Reference Court dated 9/01/2004 is hereby modified and the respondents i.e. the original applicants are held entitled to compensation at the rate of ` 19/- per square metre with all consequential statutory benefits. 8. Appeal disposed of with no order as to costs. N.A. BRITTO, J. NH/-