:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO.1304 OF 200 FIRST APPEAL NO.1304 OF 200 FIRST APPEAL NO.1304 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Metro Centre No.IV, Panvel) ...Appellant. v. 1. Pandharinath Babu Patil, age 55, 2. Vasant Babu Patil, age 44, 3. Bhagwan Babu Patil, age 38, 4. Jaman Babu Patil, age, 36, 5. Shevantabai Shankar Umbarkar, age 53, 6. Ramabai Kashinath Pethkar, age 51, 7. Bhimabai Gajanan Aglawe, age 49, 8. Sayibai Sitaram Patil, Age 40, 9. Sitabai Babu Patil, Adult, (Since deceased through her legal heirs) 9.a) Pandharinath Babu Patil, son, Age:80 yrs. b) Bhagwan Babu Patil, son, Age:60 yrs. c) Vasant Babu Patil, son, Age: 70 yrs. d) Jaman Babu Patil, son, Age:55 yrs. R/at Walvali, Tal:Panvel, Dist. Raigad. e) Shevantabai Shankar Kumbharkar, (Since deceased through her legal heirs) 9.e.1) Ramchandra Shankar Kumbharkar, Grandson, Age:58. 9.e.2) Harishchandra Shankar Kumbharkar, Grandson, Age:53. Residing at Chindran, Tal: Panvel, Dist.Raigad. 9.f) Ramabai Kashinath Pethkar, Daughter, Age: 75 yrs. g) Bhimabai Gajanan Aglave, Daughter, Age:72 yrs. h) Sayibai Sitaram Patil, Daughter, Age: 65 yrs. R/at Walvali, Tal:Panvel, Dist. Raigad. ...Respondents. Mr.S.N.Gawade, A.G.P. for the State. Mrs.Kavita Pawar i/by Vijay S. Gharat , advs. for the Respondent No.5. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. J.H.BHATIA,J. J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 27th August, 2008. DATE: 27th August, 2008. DATE: 27th August, 2008. ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: :2: 1. With consent of the learned counsel for both the parties, First Appeal is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 2. To state in brief, land survey no.26, Hissa No.4/1, Survey no.40 Hissa No.1/1, Survey no.40 Hissa no.1/4, Survey No.40 Hissa No.1/6, Survey No.40 Hissa No.1/8 and Survey No.27 Hissa No.38 situated at Village:Valavali, Taluka: Panvel, District: Raigad belonging to the respondents were acquired for the New-Bombay Project, as per the Notification under Section 4 dated 4th February, 1970. Later on, award was passed. Being not satisfied by the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, respondents made a reference under Section 18 claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.15/- per sq.mtr., being the market value of the property. Accordingly, the reference was submitted to the IInd Additional District Judge, Raigad. It was contested on behalf of the State contending that when the notice under Section 9(3)(4) was issued, no reply was filed nor any valuation was given. It is also contended that the claim of the respondents is exorbitant. 3. After hearing the parties, the learned Reference Court fixed the market rate of the property at Rs.12/- per sq.mtr. and enhanced the compensation accordingly with appropriate solatium, additional component and :3: interest as per the law. The State has preferred the present appeal challenging the enhancement of compensation by the Reference Court. It is contended that the rate fixed by the reference Court is very exorbitant and excessive. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Parties. 5. Perused the impugned judgment passed by the Reference Court. It appears that number of land references from Villages:Kalamboli, Taloja as well as Valavali were made and the trial Court noted that in case of the properties situated at Village: Kalamboli and Taloja, situated at the distance of about 2 kms. from Bombay-Pune National Highway, the High Court had fixed the rate at Rs.12/- per sq.mtr. In the present case also, the land is situated at about 2 kms. from the Bombay-Pune National highway. Therefore, the Reference Court fixed the market price of the land at Rs.12/- per sq.mtr. and computed the compensation accordingly and other benefits like solatium, additional component, etc. were granted as per the law. The learned A.G.P. Mr.S.N.Gawade fairly conceded that in First Appeal No.25 of 1993 decided by this Court on 22nd April, 2004 in respect of land from Village: Valavali situated at the distance of about 2 kms. from Bombay-Pune National Highway, this Court had fixed the price at Rs.14/- per sq.mtr. Taking into consideration :4: these circumstances and the view taken by the High Court in cases of some other properties from the same and adjoining villages, it is difficult to hold that the Reference Court has granted exorbitant compensation. Therefore, I do not find any fault with the impugned order whereby the compensation was granted at Rs.12/- per sq.mtr. No other flaw is pointed out in respect of solatium, additional component, etc. 6. Therefore, the present appeal stands dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)