-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.1060 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.1060 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.1060 OF 1992 The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant vs. 1.Shri Fakir Yeswant Shelar 2.Shri Bhau Yaswant Shelar 3.Smt.Vithabai Narayan Bhagat 4.Smt.Shanubai Chandndu Bhagat 5.Smt.Shantabai Krishna Bhoir ...Respondents Mr.B.H.Mehta,A.G.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : MARCH 14, 2008. : MARCH 14, 2008. : MARCH 14, 2008. ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard learned A.G.P. for the Appellant. The challenge in this Appeal by the State of Maharashtra is to the Judgment and Award dated 17th September 1991 passed by the learned III Additional District Judge, Raigad. The Judgment and Award has been made in a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") made at the instance of the Respondents. The acquisition relates to the agricultural land admeasuring 1300 square meter situated at village Karanjade Taluka Panvel, District Raigad which was notified on 3rd February 1970 under section 4 of the said Act for the public purpose of setting up a satellite city of Navi Mumbai. 2. The Award under section 11 of the said Act was made on 22nd September 1986. As the Award was not accepted by the -2- Respondents, a reference was made under section 18 of the said Act. 3. In the reference the Respondents prayed for the market value at the rate of Rs.20/- per square meter. By the impugned Judgment and Award, the market value has been fixed at the rate of Rs.10/- per square meter. The reference court also granted statutory benefits to the Respondents. The submission of the learned A.G.P is that the market value of the acquired land as fixed by the Reference Court is excessive and is not supported by the evidence of comparable sale instances. The learned Advocate for the Respondents has supported the impugned Judgment and Award. 4. My attention has been invited to the decision of this court dated 21st April 2006 in F.A.No.30/1993 (State of Maharshtra Vs. Ismaile Abdul Rehman). The said decision is relating to land at the village Karanjade which was notified under the same notification under section 4 of the said Act for the same public purpose. After considering the evidence on record in respect of the said land was were situated far away from national highway, the learned Single Judge has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.13/- per sq. meter. As the Judgment of this Court is in a case where the acquisition was made under the same notification for the same project, it is certainly relevant for determining the market value of the -3- acquired land in the present case. As stated earlier, the market value in the present case has been fixed at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter. In view of the aforesaid decision of the learned Single Judge of this court, it is obvious that the market value fixed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter cannot be said to be excessive. 5. There is no dispute as regards grant of statutory benefits. Hence, there is no merit in the Appeal and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE