* 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 335 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO.14 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra through, The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Dnyandeo Khashaba Chavan .....Respondent (Orig.Claimant) FIRST APPEAL NO. 336 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO.9 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Mathurabai S. Chavan & Anr. .....Respondents (Orig.Claimants) FsIRST APPEAL NO. 337 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO. 8 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Govinda Ishwara Chavan (since deceased through his heirs & legal representatives) & Anr. .....Respondents (Orig.Claimants) FIRST APPEAL NO. 338 OF 1992 * 2 * IN L.A.R. NO.7 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra ....Appellant V/s. Phattesing Tukaram Chavan and ors. .....Respondents (Orig.Claimants) Mrs. Geeta P.Mulekar, AGP for the appellant/State. None for the respondents. FIRST APPEAL NO. 343 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO.5 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Mohan Hindurao Chavan ...Respondent (Orig.Claimant) FIRST APPEAL NO. 344 OF 1992 IN L.A.R.NO.19 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Vishwanath Sawala Chavan and ors. ...Respondents (Orig.Claimants) * 3 * FIRST APPEAL NO. 346 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO. 12 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Vishwanath Maruti Chavan ...Respondent (Orig.Claimant) FIRST APPEAL NO. 348 OF 1992 IN L.A.R.NO.10 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Shri.Bhiku Pira Chavan and ors. ....Respondents (Orig.Claimants) Mr.S.P.Manchekar, AGP for appellant/State. None for the respondents. FIRST APPEAL NO. 349 OF 1992 IN L.A.R.NO.13 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Ramchandra Gopalrao Chavan ...Respondent * 4 * (Orig.Claimant) FIRST APPEAL NO. 350 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO.18 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Baburao K.Salunkhe and Ors. ...Respondents (Orig.Claimants) FIRST APPEAL NO. 351 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO.6 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Harakchand Ramchand Gujar (Bhandari) since deceased through his legal heirs & Ors. ...Respondents (Orig.Claimants) FIRST APPEAL NO. 352 OF 1992 IN L.A.R. NO.16 OF 1987 The State of Maharashtra, through The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Satara ...Appellant (Orig.Opponent) V/s. Sayaji Krishna Chavan and ors. ...Respondents (Orig.Claimants) Mr. S.N.Gawade, AGP for the appellant/State. None for the respondents. * 5 * CORAM: SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATED: 1ST DECEMBER, 2008. P.C. : 1. This is a group of appeals preferred by the State of Maharashtra to challenge the correctness and legality of the order dated 28th February, 1991 passed by the court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Satara in 12 Land Acquisition References. The respondent/s in all the appeals is/are the original claimant/s. 2. Vide notification dated 24th April, 1980 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, the appellant acquired lands situated in three villages in Taliye, Devur and Watar station for the purpose of Minor Irrigation Tank at Devur. The lands acquired were of different qualities. Some were irrigated lands, some non-irrigated lands, some pot-kharab lands, and some were of the mixed type i.e. part irrigated and part non-irrigated. The Special Land Acquisition Officer classified the lands on the basis of revenue assessment into 3 groups i.e. Group I -Inferior Class of Jirayat lands, Group II- Medium Jirayat lands and Group III- Superior Jirayat * 6 * lands. He assessed the market value of the three groups at Rs.5,000/- per hector, Rs.8,000/- per hector and Rs.10,000/- per hector respectively. As regards the lands that were part jirayat and part bagayat depending upon the group in which the land fell, he assessed their market value at one and half times the market value for the group. By following this basis, the Special Land Acquisition Officer arrived at the compensation payable to the claimants in all the 12 appeals. 4. Being dissatisfied with the calculation of market value of the acquired property by the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants preferred references under Section 18 of the said Act, contending that the Land Acquisition Officer ought to have awarded higher compensation as claimed in each of the references. The references were decided by the impugned order enhancing the compensation to Rs.10,000/- per hector for Group I, Rs.16,000/- per hector for Group II and Rs.20,000/- per hector for Group III. The appellant challenges this enhancement contending that there is no basis for the same. 5. Perusal of the judgments of the reference court, shows that the learned judge has rejected several sale instances from Index No.II relied upon by the claimants on the ground that the sale deeds concerning the transactions * 7 * were neither produced nor the purchaser and the seller examined. He however considered transactions evidenced by Index II at Exhibits-16/4 and 16/9 which had come into existence prior to the notification with an observation that the same would help to know the real trend of the market in the concerned areas. These two transactions also suffered the same setback as the earlier transactions. The claimants had neither produced the sale-deeds nor examined either the seller or the purchaser in respect thereof. In the circumstances, one fails to understand as to how the learned judge could apply a different yardstick to the sale transactions reflected at Index II at Exhibits- 16/4 and 16/9 and accept the same without evidence of any kind. The orders passed by the learned judge therefore become without any justification and the same cannot be sustained. Hence, the order. O R D E R (i) The Appeals are allowed. (ii) The orders of the Reference Court enhancing the compensation are set aside and quashed. (iii) If in the meantime, the claimants have received enhanced compensation, they shall return the same to the * 8 * State within a period of 8 weeks from today. On failure to make the payment to the State within the time granted, they shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of Rs.9 per cent per annum till the date of payment. (iv) In the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties to bear their own costs. [SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J]