1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.332 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Ganpat Lahanu Dalvi Age 22 yrs., Occ: Agri., 2 Motiram Lahanu Dalvi Age 14 yrs., Occ; Labour 3 Ashok Lahanu Dalvi Age 12 yrs., Occ: Labour, Claimants Nos.2 and 3 minor Through Guardian Lahanu Pandu Dalvi, Age 45 yrs., Occ: Agri., All r/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondents. (Org. Claimants) WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.333 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3719 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Sonu Mahadu Gaikwad Since deceased through his heirs, 1A Kashinath Sonu Gaikwad R/of Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik 1B Kantabai Bhaurao Dalvi R/of Tatani, Post: Dalwat, 2 Tal: Kalwan, Dist. Nashik 1C Jayawantabai Sonu Gaikwad R/of Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik 2 Malhari Mahadu Gaikwad Age 25 years, Occ; Agri., R/o Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ..Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.334 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Janu Bendu Pawar, Age 45 yrs., Occ:Agri., R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.335 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Valu Dhanjee Gaikwad, Age 35 yrs., 2 Motiram Dhanjee Gaikwad, age 30 yrs., 3 Kashiram Dhanjee Gaikwad, age 25 yrs., 4 Shankar Dhanjee Gaikwad, Age 22 yrs., Occupation of all agriculture, resident of Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. ...Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.336 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, 3 (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Zipra Ranga Gaikwad,Age Adult, Post Borgaon, At Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.337 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, CIDCO , Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Kalu Ablu Gavit, age 40 yrs., Occ: Agriculture, resident of Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.338 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Soma Wala Dalvi, age 40 yr., 2 Jiwala Wala Dalvi, age 36 yrs., Occ: agriculture. 3 Kashiram Wala Dalvi, age 30 yrs., Occ: Agri., 4 Ramji Wala Dalvi, Age 25 yrs., Occ; Agri., 5 Mirabai Tulashya Jophel, age 35 yrs., Occ; Household, R/o. Bhovati, 6 Bhimabai Mohan Pawar, Age 30 yrs., Occ: Household, R/o. Aubadar, 4 7 Kamli Kashinath Chaudhari Age 35 yrs., Occ: Household, R/o. Shingoshi, Tal: Kalwan, Dist. Nashik ...Respndents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.339 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3731 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Motiram Unha Pawar ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.340 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Manglya Devaji Bhoye, age 45 yrs., Occ; Agri., R/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.341 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Dhanji Kalu Gaikwad, age 60 yrs., Occ; Agri., R/o, Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. 1 Valu Dhanaji Gaikwad 5 age 45 yrs., relation son 2 Soniram Dhanaji Gaikwad Age 40 yrs., relation son 3 Kashiram Dhanaji Gaikwad Age 38 yrs., relation son 4 Shankar Dhanaji Gaikwad age 35 yrs., relation son, 5 Salubai Dhanaji Gaikwad Age 70 yrs., relation wife, All above r/o at Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. 6 Paribai Jivala Bhoye Age 42 yrs., relation daughter, R/o at Post Nagshevadi K. Mohapada Tal:Surgana , Dist. Nashik 7 Bhagibai Chandar Raut, Age 32 yrs., relation daughter, R/o at post Sajol Post Hatgad, Tal: Surgana , Dist. Nashik ...Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.343 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Pandit Dhanaji Dalavi Age 40 yrs., Occ;Agriculturist, Resident of Pohali, Post: Borgaon, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.344 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). 6 vs. Mr. Phaji Hirya Gaikwad, age 50 yrs., Occ; Agri., resident of Pohali, Tal:Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.345 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Kashiram Bandu Pawar, age 45 yrs., Occ: Agri., 2 Janu Bandu Pawar, age 40 yrs., Occ: Agri., 3 Khandu Bandu Pawar, Age 35 yrs., Occ; Agri., All r/o. Village: Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. ..Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.346 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Sonu Bendu Pawar, age 42 yrs., Occ; Agri., R/o Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ..Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 347 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Sakharam Ranga Gangurde Age 70 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Ghodambe 7 2 Deu Ranga Gangurde Age 65 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Ghotul, 3 Kashiram Lahanu Gangurde, Age 40 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Dewali Karhat 4 Smt. Bedibai Govinda Gangurde Age 65 yrs., Occ: Household, R/o. Ghodambe, 5 Smt. Tulsabai Nawji Gavit Age 50 yrs., Occ: Household, R/o. Dewli, Harhat. 6 Sawaliram Govinda Gangurde, Age 37 yrs., Occ: Service, R/o. Ombarthan, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. ..Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.348 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Dharma Ganga Gaikwad Age 35 yrs., 2 Ratan Ganga Gaikwad Age 25 yrs. 3 Sitaram Ganga Gaikwad 4 Ramju Ganga Gaikwad Since deceased through his legal heirs 4i Smt. Patibai Ramju Gaikwad, wife, 36 yrs., 4ii Gopal Ramju Gaikwad, son, 7 yrs., 4iii Tulshiram Ramju Gaikwad, son, 4 yrs., 4iv Anusayya Ramju Gaikwad, daughter, 1 ½ yrs, All R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. ...Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.349 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. 8 (Org. Opponent). vs. Manglu Dhanji Dalvi, Age 60 yrs., Occ: Agri., Residing at Hatgad, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.350 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3730 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Motiram Dayajee Gaikwad, Age 45 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.351 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3739 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Raoju Hari Bagul, Age 85 yrs., General Power of Attorney, Holder Shri Hiraman Raoju Bagul, Age 34 yrs., R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. 9 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.352 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3749 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Jivalu Ramji Gaikwad Age 32 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik Since deceased through his legal heirs. 1 Ramesh Jivalu Gaikwad Son, Age 16 yrs., 2 Latabai Jivalu Gaikwad Daughter age 14 yrs., Minor Respondent 1 and 2 minor through their Natural guardian respondent no.3 3 Smt. Hausabai Jivalu Gaikwad wife age 35 yrs., R/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ..Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.353 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Ramesh Pandu Dalvi, age 45 yrs., Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.354 OF 1997 10 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3720 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.184 OF 1999 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Shri Arjun Govinda Bhoye Age 50 yrs., Occ: Agriculture, 2 Smt. Kamibai Govinda Bhoye, Age 70 yrs., Occ: Household, Both r/o Borgaon, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.355 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3729 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Lahanu Pandu Delvi, age 40 yrs., Occ; Agriculture, residing at Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.356 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Shri Kalu Chimana Bhoye, age 50 yrs. 11 2 Shri Yewaji Chimana Bhoye, age 40 yrs., 3 Shri Kisan Chimana Bhoye, age 30 yrs., Occ. of all Agri., All R/o. Borgaon, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.357 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3733 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Shri Gopal Raoji Bhoye ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.358 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Shri Chandar Devaji Bhoye Age 42 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ..Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.359 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Pahujee Hiraji Gaikwad, age 50 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. 2 Laxman Zambra Gaikwad, age 30 yrs., 12 Occ: Agri., 3 Saguna Zambra Gaikwad, Nos.2 and 3 R/o. Bendipada, Tal; Kawan, Dist. Nashik ...Respondents. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.360 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3742 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. 1 Soma Pandu Gaikwad, age 45 yrs., 2 Nathu Pandu Gaikwad, age 30 yrs., Occ: of both Agri., Both R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ....Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.361 OF 1997 The State of Maharashtra, (Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation, Nashik) ...Appellant. (Org. Opponent). vs. Ganpat Lahanu Gaikwad, Age 50 yrs., Occ: Agri., R/o. Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik ...Respondent. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.362 OF 1997 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3727 OF 1997 Pandu Bandya Gangurde, 42 yrs., Occ. Agri., R/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik Since deceased through Legal heirs, 13 1 Kisan Pandu Gangurde, 29 yrs., Son 2 Tukaram Pandu Gangurde 26 yrs., son 3 Ramdas Pandu Gangurde 23 yrs., son 4 Daulat Pandu Gangurde 20 yrs., Son 5 Smt. Yashoodabai Arjun Gaikwad 24 yrs., daughter, 6 Smt. Radhabai Laxman Pawar 18 yrs., daughter, All r/o. Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar , AGP For the Appellants in F.A.Nos.332/97 to 341/97 and F.A.Nos.343/97 to 347/97. Ms.S.P.Manchekar, AGP for the Appellants in F.A.Nos.348/97 to 362/97. Mr.V.Z.Kankaria ,adv. for the Respondents. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 29th August , 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1 All these appeals arise out of the common judgment passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Nashik as a Reference Court while dealing with the land reference nos. 530 to 544 of 1989, Reference Nos. 27 to 29 of 1991 and Reference Nos.36 to 48 of 1991. In all these matters, land was acquired for minor irrigation tank at Village: Ghodambe, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. Land was situated within Village: 14 Pohali, Tal: Surgana, Dist. Nashik. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 19th July, 1986, whereby the Government proposes to acquire these lands for the minor irrigation tank. Further Notifications under Section 6 and 9 were published on 21.2.1987 and the Special Land Acquisition Officer passed the award on 4.3.1989. Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.5,000/- PH for Jirayat land and at the rate of Rs.7,500/- PH for Tari land. Claimants, being not satisfied with the same, made reference applications and accordingly, the Special Land Acquisition Officer submitted reference applications to the District Court under Section 18. According to the claimants, compensation awarded was very meagure taking into consideration their location, quality, fertility and the market prices. Lands are situated abutting Maharashtra-Gujarat Highway. Some of the claimants also claimed that appropriate compensation was not paid for the trees standing on their lands. Claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.30,000/- for Jirayat land and at the rate of Rs.50,000/- PH for the superior land. Government participated in the proceedings but did not file any written statement. 2 On behalf of all the claimants, only three witnesses were examined namely, P.W.1 Govinda Gaikwad, P.W.2 Dharma Gaikwad and 15 P.W.3 Sonu Pawar. No evidence was led on behalf of the Government. After hearing the parties, the Reference Court came to conclusion that compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was inadequate. According to him, reasonable compensation would be Rs. 20,000/- PH for all the lands. Accordingly, market value of the lands was determined. Additional component and the solatium were added and the enhanced compensation was finalised. State of Maharashtra, being not satisfied with the determination of the market value, has preferred all these appeals. 3 At the outset, it may be stated that out of group of 31 appeals before this Court, in First Appeal Nos.338/97, 350/97, 352/97, 361/97, 362/97, some of the respondents have not been properly served and strictly speaking those appeals could not be ready for final hearing. However, for the reasons, which would follow and the circumstances, the learned A.G.P. fairly conceded that all these appeals may be disposed off . 4 Only point which arises for my determination is: Whether the Reference Court was justified in awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.20,000/- PH. My finding is in affirmative. 5 The Reference Court observed that for the determination of 16 the market value of the land most appropriate method is to find out and rely upon sale instances of the properties, which are the most comparable in similarity in land, proximity in situation and the time, with similar advantage. The price, which could be fetched by such land would be market price of the land acquired. Only if such sale instances are not available, Court may turn to the method of capitalisation. The learned Reference Court observed that the land under acquisition belongs to Adivasis or Nomadic Tribe. There was complete ban on the sale of the land of Adivasis and, therefore, there were no sale instances , which could be available for comparison and for assessment of the market value. Therefore, he ventured upon the capitalisation method to find out market value of the property. For this purpose, he considered average gross yield, costs of cultivation, average price of the commodities during the relevant period. The learned Reference Court did not accept the evidence of P.W.1 Govinda, who claimed that the first crop was paddy and second crop was gram or sugar-cane, in view of the fact that sugar-cane can never be second crop because it continues for three years. Evidence of P.W.3 Sonu was also not given much importance because according to him, only trees were standing in his land and he deposed about the fruits and yield of his land . The main evidence is of P.W.2 17 Dharma. According to him, from 3 acres 6 gunthas of land, he was getting crop of 10 gunny bags of wheat, 20 bags of paddy and 5 bags of gram and 2 bags of Nagali. Relevant period is 1986 when the Notification under Section 4 was issued. Reference Court called information from the Agricultural Market Committee about the market prices of wheat, paddy, gram, nagali. During the relevant period, on the basis of information provided by the Market Committee, the Reference Court found that the average prices were as follows: Wheat : Rs. 250 per quintal Paddy : Rs.262 per quintal Gram : Rs.450 per quintal Nagli : Rs.175 per quintal On the basis of this information, he calculated that total price of the yield would be Rs.5,600/- PH 60% of the same could be treated as agricultural expenses to get that yield. After deduction of the expenses, net annual income from the land would be Rs.2,240/- PH. He initially applied multiplier of 20 years and the amount became Rs.44,800/-. However, finally he reduced the same to Rs.20,000/- PH by applying capitalisation method and on that basis, he determined market value of the land according to the area. 18 6 The learned AGP point out that in Airports Authority of India vs. Satyagopal Roy and Others AIR 2002 SC 1423, the Supreme Court had also approved capitalisation method, where there was no other reliable method to find out exact market price of the property. After relying on the several authorities, the Supreme Court found that under the capitalisation method, multiplier has to be based on the interest yielded by the amount deposited in fixed deposit. It was found that the multiplier has been applied from time to time at 25, 20, 16, 11 and 8. However, it was approved that 10 years multiplier would be the most reasonable. Taking into consideration the rates of interests prevailing, it may be noted that upto the year 2000, rates of interest in the market were quite high and sometimes, one could get interest at the rate of 12% or more in fixed deposit with Nationalised Banks while on the debentures and the loans issued by the private companies, rates would be higher. After the year 2001, rates came down. Anyhow, taking into consideration rates, 10 years multiplier would be reasonable. In the present case, as the net income would be Rs.2,240/- on application of 10 years multiplier and capitalised value of the land would be Rs.22,400/- PH. In the present case, Reference Court initially applied multiplier of 20 but then reduced that amount substantially to Rs.20,000/- PH and thus, in 19 reality, multiplier of 9 only was applied, which cannot be excessive by any stretch of imagination. 7 Taking into consideration these circumstances, I find that no objection can be taken to the market value determined by the Reference Court. Therefore, I do not find any material to interfere in the impugned judgment and order 8 For the aforesaid reasons, all these appeals stand dismissed. As the appeals are dismissed, civil applications do not survive and stand disposed off accordingly. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)