-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST FIRST FIRST APPEAL NO.51 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.51 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.51 OF 1992 Bhagwan Ganpat Patil ...Appellant vs. The State of Maharashtra (Special Land Acquisition Officer,Panvel) ...Respondent Mr.G.H.Keluskar h/f Mr.N.V.Walawalkar for the Appellant Ms G.P.Mulekar A.G.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : MARCH 10, 2008. : MARCH 10, 2008. : MARCH 10, 2008. ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard learned Advocates for the parties. The Appellant has taken exception to the Judgment and Award dated 31st March 1990 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Raigad, Alibag. The said Judgment and Award was made in a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act".) 2. The acquisition relates to the lands admeasuring 5160 sq. metres situated at village Nawade, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad. The said lands were notified on 3ard February 1970 under section 4 of the said Act for the public purpose of setting up a satellite city of Navi Mumbai. 3. The Award was made on 9th July 1986 under section 11 of the said Act. As the claimant-Appellant did not accept the Award, at his instance a reference under section 18 of the -2- said Act was made in which the market value was claimed at the rate of Rs.25/- per square metre. 4. The Reference Court by the impugned Judgment and Award has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per square metre and has granted statutory benefits to the Appellant. 5. The learned Advocate for the Appellant has placed reliance on the decision of this Court dated 30th March 2007 in First Appeal No.572 of 1991 (State of Maharashtra Vs. Joma Mhatre). He also placed reliance on certain decisions of the Division Bench which are referred to in the aforesaid decision and submitted that the market value of the acquired land ought to have been fixed at the rate of Rs.25/- per square metre. The learned A.G.P. for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra submitted that there was no evidence adduced even to justify the grant of market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per square metre. Hence, no interference is called for. 6. The Appellant examined his son in support of his case. In support of his case, the Appellant also examined Mr.Jeevan Narayan Kulkarni, a valuer. The report of the valuer and the map drawn by the valuer were proved in evidence. The report discloses that the acquired lands are situated close to the Bombay Pune national highway, but the same are not abutting the national highway. -3- 7. For the reasons recorded in the Judgment delivered today in First Appeal No.825 of 1991 with First Appeal No.1124 of 1991, in the present case, the market value of the acquired land will have to be fixed at the rate of Rs.25/- per square metre. In this case, there is no dispute regarding grant of statutory benefits. 8. Hence, I pass the following order : i) First Appeal is partly allowed. ii) The market value of the acquired land is fixed at Rs.25/- per square metre. In addition to the market value, the claimant-appellant will be entitled to statutory benefits under section 23(1-A), 23 (2) and 28 of the said Act of 1894. iii) The Appellant will be entitled to proportionate costs of the reference as well as this Appeal . iv) The exercise of calculating the amount of compensation payable to the Appellant shall be completed by the learned Trial Judge within a period of four months from the date of receipt of writ of this Judgement. -4- v) Writ to be sent down immediately. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE