1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL No.3465/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Shivkaran s/o Maruti Gobade, Age : 40 years, Occu.: Agriculture, R/o Gunjarega, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1) ........ Shri D.G. Ansingkar, Advocate for appellant. Shri M.S. Patil, Advocate, for respondent no.1. Shri D.V. Tele, A.G.P. for respondent no.2 / State. ............. FIRST APPEAL No.3464/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its 2 Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Sambhaji s/o Shripati Shinde, Age : 40 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq.Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1) FIRST APPEAL No.3466/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Bhim s/o Vishwanath Shinde, Age : 40 yers, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & 3 respondent no.1) FIRST APPEAL No.3467/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Kondiba s/o Vithoba Gobade, Age : 45 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 Balaji s/o Vithoba Gobade, Age : 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 3 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1) FIRST APPEAL No.3468/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its 4 Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Sunil /o Vithalrao Shinde, Age : 30 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1) FIRST APPEAL No.3469/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Baliram /o Vithoba Gobade, Age : 37 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & 5 respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3470/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Hanmant s/o Narayan Shinde (Died) through his L.Rs. Sushilabai w/o Hanmant Shinde, Age : 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3471/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) 6 Versus 1 Ashok s/o Girjappa Dhumal, Age : 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3472/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Shivram s/o Sakharam Suryawanshi, Age : 60 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 Dhruva s/o Krishna Shinde, Age : 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 3 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. 7 (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3748/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Pralhad s/o Krishna Shinde, Age : 40 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 Dhruva s/o Krishna Shinde, Age : 40 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 3 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3749/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its 8 Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Venkat s/o Namdeo Shinde, Age : 50 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3750/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Shivaji s/o Mahadu Koli, Age : 60 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & 9 respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3751/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Daulatrao s/o Bhavantrao Dhumal, Age : 55 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3752/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 10 1 Argad s/o Manik Shinde, Age : 70 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) FIRST APPEAL No.3754/2008 The Executive Engineer, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, Aurangabad through its Lower Terana Project, Canal Division No.2, Latur. ...Appellant. (Ori. Resp. no.2) Versus 1 Ramakant s/o Mahadeo Gobade, Age : 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o Gunjerga, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur. 2 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Latur. ...Respondents. (Ori. Claimant & respondent no.1.) Shri D.G. Ansingkar, Advocate for appellant. Shri M.S. Patil, Advocate for respondent no.1. Shri D.V. Tele A.G.P. for respondent /State. 11 CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J Date : 10 th March, 2010. ORAL COMMON JUDGMENT :- 1 Group of appeals is finally heard at admission stage. Admit appeals. Record and proceedings is available. Perused. 2 Evidence of Bhim Vishwanath Shinde recorded in L.A.R. No. 655/1998 for all purposes, is considered in the appeals. 3 The learned counsel for the appellant / acquiring body canvassed, the sole sale instance of village Sindkhed (Exh. 90) relied upon by the learned reference court, is erroneous as the property under acquisition was from village Gunjerga. L.A.O. had opportunity to refer 8 sale instances from village Gunjerga, he had also considered quality and fertility of the land under acquisition. The learned counsel submits, the award is on excessive pedestal. The amount awarded by L.A.O. @ Rs.11,600/- per acre of dry land or Rs. 13,200/- per acre for irrigated land was just and reasonable, required no interference. 4 Learned counsel for the land holders / respondents informs that the exercise of appeal by acquiring body simply warrants condemnation as very meager piece of land of individual claimant is acquired. The claimants are required to face litigation from pillar to post to get legitimate amount of their 12 lost land. The learned counsel also submits that the claimants have independently resorted for enhancement as they have been compensated with inadequate award by the learned reference court. 5 The notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of Nimna – Terna canal was dated 22/10/1991, the declaration under section 6 was dated 17-06-1993 and the award of the L.A.O. was dated 27-04-1995. The respective properties of the land holders were taken possession in the year 1989. Bhim Vishwanath Shinde, one of the land holders has pointed that at village Gunjerga, land is located on Ambulga – Yelnoor road. It has facilities with the electricity. It is located near Gram Panchayat, weekly market is available to the village. Agricultural fields comes within command area, Ambulga and Killari Sugar factory Tq. Nilanga, are at distance of 6 to 7 k.m. from Gunjerga. He also stressed, acquired land was black cotton soil with depth of 50 to 60 feet located at the bank of Terna river irrigated with well water. Sugar cane, vegetables and other net annual crops were drawn. Revenue record was produced before court. Prevailing rate in the year 1991 was Rs.4,2500/- per acre for dry land and Rs.70,000/- to 75,000/- per acre for Bagayat land. In the same tune, demand was made to the competent authority. L.A.O. has granted compensation @ Rs.12,600/- per acre which is apparently inadequate compensation and at lowest rate. Award was passed behind their 13 back. It was so communicated to the claimants by Talathi and consequently compensation was accepted under protest. 6 The sale instance of Sindkhed of one Vithoba was put on record. Vishwanath Rama Madiwad was examined. He has stated, Kamlakar has sold one acre land from survey no. 52 in the year 1989 @ Rs.40,000/-, it was dry land. Though he accepted in the cross examination that, purchaser had adjoining property at northern side but by that itself the value potentiality and quality will not be diminished even if discounting or concession is given. The learned judge has rather rightly considered sale instances of Rs.40,000/-, reducing it to Rs.23,000/- per acre. 7 The contention that land is situated at Sindkhed, land under acquisition of Gunjerga, is answered by the claimant by indicating that the land of said Vithoba is not far away. It is nearby distance of village Sindkheda. It is on record that maximum distance of the village Gunjerga and Sindkheda is 2 k.m.. Learned reference court has on analysis of the evidence considered that the sale instance was of 1989 while notification under section 4 was dated 22/10/1991. In the light of legal position, he added to the said market price of Rs.23,000/-per acre as 10% rising price for one year and calculated same @ Rs.25,000/- per acre. This arrangement was made only for few of the references except L.A.R. No. 649/1998 and L.A.R. No. 659/1998. Thus, the 14 grievance that appreciation is incorrect, is far from record. 7/12 extract of few lands produced also dealt with by the learned reference court. The learned reference court has also, while answering issue no.3 dealt with limitation and recorded that the claims were in limitation, with reference to various documents. This does not require any interference. 8 The learned reference court had the opportunity to refer judgment in the matter of R.L. Jain vs. D.D.A. & Others reported in AIR 2004 S.C. 1904. 9 The contention of learned counsel representing the land holder / claimants that the acquiring body should not have preferred appeal considering the meager status of the property indeed needs consideration. The chart below mentioned in the 15 appeals illustrate that barring F.A. No. 3470/2008 almost all the lands are ranging from 4 R, 3 R, 10 R, 20 R, 38 R, 10 R. Sr. No. Name of Applicant F.A. No. Area Acquired 1 Angad Manik Shinde 3752/2008 0.10 R land 2 Bhimrao (died( L.RS Balikabai Bhimrao Gobade & Others. 0.58 R land 3 Pralhad Krishna Shinde 3748/2008 0.12 R land 4 Bhim Vishwanath Shinde 3466/2008 0.72R 28R land 15 5 Ramakant Mahadeo Gobade 3754/2008 0.32 R land 6 Shivaji Mahadu Koli 3750/3008 0.38 R land 7 Sambhaji Shripati Shinde 3468/2008 1 Hec. 36 R land 8 Shivkaran Maruti Gobade 3465/2008 0.86 R land 9 Hanmant (died) Lrs. Sushilabai & others 3470/2008 0.96 R land 10 Sunil Vithalrao Shinde 3464/2008 0.4 R land 11 Kondiba Vithalrao Gobade 3467/2008 0.18 R land 12 Shahaji (died) L.rs. Balaji & Others. 0.12 R land 13 Ashok Girjappa Dhumal 3471/2008 0.26 R & 5R land 14 Daulatrao Bhagwanrao Dhumal 3751/2008 0.3 R land 15 Vithoba (died) L.rs. Kondiba & others 0.57 R land 16 Shivrm Sakaram Suryawanshi 3472/2008 0.2 R land 17 Kadaji (died) L.r. Dhondiram Mane 73 R land 18 Venkat Namdeo Shinde 3749/2009 0.20 R land 19 Baliram Vithoba Gobade 3469/2008 0.24 R land. Taking factual matrix on this count, as stated earlier, claimants were required to wander from several positions to stake claim for having lost their 16 immovable property that for public a project initiated by the Government. While maintaining the equity, it was also expected that the concern of the land holders should have also been required to be pivotally seen. Their claims should not have been sabotaged on such technical aspect, as has been tried to be coiled by appellant herein. 10 The appreciation of evidence as caused by learned reference court, appreciation of sale instances, does not warrant any interference. The enhancement is in tune with record. Appeals dismissed. No costs. [K.U. CHANDIWAL, J ] tsk/fa3465.08