ash 1 fa-880.95 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.880 OF 1995 Vishwanath Balu Patil & Others. .. Appellants Vs The State of Maharashtra. .. Respondents -- Shri Rajiv L. Patil for the Appellants. Shri A.R. Patil, AGP for Respondent. -- CORAM ; A.S. OKA, J DATED : 17TH FEBRUARY, 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT: . Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants and the learned AGP for the State. The Appellants, who are the original claimants, have taken an exception to the judgment and award dated 10th July, 1991 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Raigad, Alibag whereby the Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) has been partly allowed. 2. The acquisition relates to a land admeasuring 9140 sq. meters in Village-Vahal, Taluka- Panvel, District Raigad which was ash 2 fa-880.95 notified under Section 4 of the said Act on 3rd February, 1970 for the public purpose of setting up satellite city of New Bombay. The award under Section 11 of the said Act was made in the year 1986. At the instance of the Appellants, a reference under Section 18 of the said Act was made to the District Court in which the market value was claimed at the rate of Rs.20/- per sq. metre. By the impugned judgment and award, the Reference Court has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs. 5/- per sq. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Avinash Dhavaji Naik v. State of Maharashtra, [(2009)11 SCC 171 ]. He pointed out that in case of a similarly situated land, the Apex Court has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter. The learned AGP appearing for the State supported the impugned judgment and award. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions. In the case of Avinash Dhavaji Naik (supra), the Apex Court dealt with the appeal arising out of a Reference under Section 18 of the said Act relating to the land at village Vahal, admeasuring 5300 sq. meters which was notified under Section 4 of the said Act on 3rd February, 1970 for the same public purpose. ash 3 fa-880.95 5. The Apex Court considered the fact that large tracts of land falling in 96 villages in Thane and Raigad Districts were notified on the same date for the same public purpose. Paragraphs 11 to 15 of the said decision read thus: - “11. The purpose for acquisition of land was building a new city. A vast tract of land was sought to be acquired. Indisputably, in terms of Section 23 of the Act, the market value of the land was required to be determined as was obtaining in the year 1970 when the notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued. It is unfortunate that despite the fact that Notification was issued under Section 4 of the Act as far back as on 3-2-1970 and a declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 21-5-1971, the award came to be passed only on 30-6-1986 and that too probably, only having regard to the consequences ensuing in terms of Section 11-A of the Act. 12. A finding of fact was arrived at by the learned Reference Judge that no sale instance was available for the lands situated in the village Wahal and there was no industrial or commercial development therein. The Pune-Bombay Highway was constructed in the year 1978. The MIDC pipeline was constructed in the year 1978. There was no railway station nearby the village. The villagers did not obtain any electricity connection. The land was a grassy land. In the absence of any example of sale being available, the Reference Court was required to take recourse to other methods of valuation. We do not find that enough materials had been brought on record to establish the yield of the lands sought to be acquired, which are admittedly agricultural in nature. In all fairness, the State should have brought on record the requisite information viz. the nature of the crop, the annual average yield, availability of irrigation facilities, etc. so as to enable the Reference Court to arrive at a correct decision in regard to grant of compensation under the Act. ash 4 fa-880.95 13. Although the lands in question were agricultural in nature, they were being used for making a town like Bombay. A new port known as Nhava Sheva Port had come into being which is a few kilometers away from the village. The roads were being constructed. The road to Nhava Shiva Port from Bombay is a district board road which is within 7 km from the village in question. A copy of the New Bombay Development Plan has been placed before us to point out construction of the national highway i.e. Bombay-Pune Road as also the other district board roads. 14. The potentiality of a land for the purpose of development as also for building purposes would depend upon a large number of factors. For the said purpose, the court may not only have to bear in mind the purpose for which the lands were sought to be acquired but also the subsequent events to some extent. 15. In a case of this nature the court may proceed on the presumption that such a vast tract of land viz. 96 villages were sought to be acquired at the same time for construction of New Bombay. We are not unmindful of the fact that development in the entire area was not possible at one point of time. Development of the area must have taken place in phases. We are also not unmindful of the fact that the price of the land may skyrocket depending upon the development as also future potentiality.” Thereafter, the Apex Court considered a decision of the Division Bench of this Court relating to the lands at village Panvel and Kamothe which were notified on the same date for the same public purpose. In Paragraph 21, the Apex Court held thus:- “21. We have arrived at the rate of Rs.10 per square meter of land for the purpose of grant of compensation because the distance between Village Panvel and Village Wahal is about 9 km. Panvel was a municipal area, Wahal was a Gram Panchayat. We have noticed hereinbefore that even the electricity had not reached Village Wahal.” ash 5 fa-880.95 6. The decision of the Apex Court is squarely applcable to the present case. The Appellants will be entitled to market value at the same rate. Therefore, the Appeal must succeed partly. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER : (i) The Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and award is modified by directing that the market value of the acquired land shall be Rs.10/- per sq. meter inclusive of the market value offered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. (iii) In addition, the Appellants will be entitled to the statutory benefits under Section 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. (iv) The Appellants will be entitled to the proportionate costs of the Appeal and the Reference. ash 6 fa-880.95 (v) The compensation payable as per the modified award shall be determined by the Reference Court within a period of three months from the date on which the writ of this judgment is received by the Reference Court. (vi) Enhanced amount shall be deposited by the State Government within a period of three months from the date on which the amount is determined. ( A.S. OKA, J )