1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA First Appeal No. 111/2007 Goa Industrial Development Corporation through its Managing Director, having Office at EDC Complex, Patto, Panaji, Goa. ... APPELLANT V e r s u s 1. Communidade of Loutolim, Loutolim, Salcete-Goa. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Goa-IDC, Panaji-Goa, ...RESPONDENTS WITH Cross Objection No. 14/2008 Goa Industrial Development Corporation through its Managing Director, having Office at EDC Complex, Patto, Panaji,Goa. ... APPELLANT V e r s u s Communidade of Loutolim, Loutolim, Salcete-Goa. ...RESPONDENT ================================================ Mr. M. S. Sonak, Advocate for appellant. Mr. S. D. Padiyar, Advocate for respondent. ================================================ Coram: S. A. BOBDE & F.M. REIS, JJ. Date: 6 th July, 2011 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: F. M. Reis, J.) 1. Heard Shri Sonak, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri Padiyar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The above appeal challenges the judgment and award dated 1/08/2006 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao in Land Acquisition Case No.42/2004. Pursuant to notification dated 23.11.2000 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, herein after referred to as “the said Act”, land was acquired for the expansion of Industrial Estate Phase IV EPIP at Verna/Loutolim Village of Salcete Taluka. The area of the land acquired belonging to the respondent no.1/Communidade was admeasuring 19,43,009 square metres from the property surveyed under no.160/1 to 279/3, except survey no.161/2 and 257 of Revenue Village of Loutulim of Salcete Taluka. The Land Acquisition Officer while passing the award under Section 11 of the said Act offered the compensation for the land acquired at the rate of Rs.10/- per square metre. 3 3. Being dissatisfied with the said amount, the respondent no.1 filed a reference under Section 18 of the said Act for enhancement of compensation and claimed a sum of Rs.400/- per square metre for the land acquired. By judgment and award dated 01/08/2006, the Reference Court has partly allowed the said reference and fixed the compensation for the land acquired at the rate of Rs.20/- per square metre, besides statutory benefits. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellants/acquiring body have preferred the present appeal. 4. The respondent no.1/Communidade after being served with the summons in the above appeal have filed the above cross- objection seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. During the course of the hearing of the above appeal and the cross-objection, both the learned Counsel pointed out that the above appeal and the cross-objection can be disposed off on the basis of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 23/12/2010 passed in First Appeal No.140/2006. Both the learned Counsel further pointed out that the land which was subject 4 matter of the acquisition in the said First Appeal was also for the same industrial estate though in the neighbouring village. The Counsel for respondent no.1 further pointed out that they desire to rely upon the judgments passed by the Division Bench of this Court referred to in the said judgment whilst determining the compensation of the lands acquired in the neighbouring village for the same purpose. Shri Padiyar, the learned Counsel for the Communidade further pointed out that he also wants to rely upon the judgment passed by this Court in First Appeal No.300/2003, as according to him, the land in the present acquisition proceedings is similar to the land acquired therein. Shri Sonak, learned Counsel for the appellants, has disputed the said contention and submitted that the lands are not comparable. Be that as it may, the parties will have to adduce evidence to establish the comparability of the lands acquired in the present proceedings and the lands which were subject matter of the said acquisition in the neighbouring villages. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and for the reasons recorded in the said judgment dated 23/12/2010, we pass the following order: 5 O R D E R (i) First appeal and Cross-objection are partly allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 01.08.2006 is quashed and set aside. (iii) Land Acquisition Case No. 42/2004 is restored to the file of the Reference Court. The Reference Court is directed to decide the Reference proceeding afresh after giving an opportunity to both the parties to lead further evidence, in accordance with law. All contentions of both the parties are left open. (iv) The parties are directed to appear before the reference Court on 22.08.2011 at 2.30 p.m. and abide by further orders. (v) The appeal and cross-objection are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. S. A. BOBDE, J. F.M. REIS, J. kahale