1 FA.No.203 .05+3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 203 OF 1995 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Osmanabad. Appellant V E R S U S 1] Dagdu Shripati Shitole, Age 38 years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Naigaon, Ta. Kallam, District Osmanabad. 2] Balu S/o Shripati Shitole, Age 34 years Occupation Agriculturist,R/o as above. Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 200 OF 1995 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Osmanabad. Appellant V E R S U S Vaijanth S/o Trimbak Aglawe, Age 32 years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Naigaon, Ta. Kallam, District Osmanabad. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 199 OF 1995 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Osmanabad. Appellant V E R S U S Sambhaji S/o Rajaram Shinde, Age 46 years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Naigaon, Ta. Kallam, District Osmanabad. Respondent 2 FA.No.203 .05+3 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 201 OF 1995 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Osmanabad. Appellant V E R S U S Govind S/o Ambadas Garad, Age 50 years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Naigaon, Ta. Kallam, District Osmanabad. Respondent ... Mrs.V.A.More,Advocate for Appellant Mr. R.L.Chintalwar,Advocate for respondents ... CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 22ND FEBRUARY, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1] All these first appeals can be disposed of by this common judgment. 2] These Appeals are filed against the Judgment and Award passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division Osmanabad, on 10.12.1993 in the Land Acquisition References, under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, filed by the respondents/claimants. . It is admitted fact that, the respondents lost their lands for construction of percolation tank at village Naigaon Tq. Kallam. After due 3 FA.No.203 .05+3 proceeding initiated under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, the learned Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.120/- Per Sq. R to the respondents/claimants. The respondents/claimants filed land Acquisition References and claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per hectare (Rs.500/- Per Sq.R). 3] The appellant-State opposed the reference mainly, on two points. The appellant asserted that the References were filed after expiry of limitation period, and secondly the compensation awarded was adequate. . The learned Judge of the Reference Court framed issues, recorded the evidence of the respondents/claimants and came to conclusion that the respondents/claimants were entitled to Rs. 700/- Per Sq. R. This finding has been challenged in this appeal. 4] Upon hearing submissions of both Advocates, following points arise for my determination. Whether the sale instance Exh.29 of land at village Murud is reliable and relevant evidence while deciding the market value of the Reference land? 5] The respondents/claimants placed reliance on only one sale instance which they produced at 4 FA.No.203 .05+3 Exh.29. They, even examined the vendor, who sold the land. The land which was sold by [the witness No.2]-Yeshwant measured 26.5 Guntha. It was sold in the year 1982 for Rs.24,600/-. The distance between the land under sale instance and lands of the claimants was about 1½ K.M. The sale instance, thus shows that the land under sale instance was sold at the rate of Rs.928/-Per Sq.R. The question before me is, “whether the sale instance is relevant for the purpose of determining the market value of the lands under Reference?” 6] The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant suggested that since the land of sale instance was from different village, it can not be held to be comparable unless the appellant could show that conditions prevailed in the adjoining village Murud were not different than the conditions prevailed in village Naigaon. As said above, the distance between the lands was about 1½ K.M. Besides, the village Naigaon is adjoining village of Murud. In the cross examination, the appellant could bring an admission from the witness of the respondents/claimants that the distance between Naigaon and Murud is about 4/5 K.M., and a public transport bus would take about 15 minutes time for traveling the distance between the village Naigaon and Murud. This, however, would not make much difference, because what is relevant is the distance between the lands in question. If they are only 1½ K.M. away from each 5 FA.No.203 .05+3 other, unless contrary is proved the Court would presume that the condition around the lands in question were resembling. 7] The respondent’s witness No.2 Yeshwant, stated that the lands of the claimants were adjoining to his lands and so he had occasion to know them. Assuming this witness is rather over enthusiastic and was trying to reduce the distance between the lands in question, the fact remains that the lands in question were situated at a distance of 1½ K.M. from each other. There is nothing on record to show as to whether some extra attributes were attached to the land under sale instance, so it was sold at a higher price that too, way back in the year 1982, four years prior to date of notification. So, reliance on this sale instance for determining the market value of the Reference land can not be said to be incorrect. In view of this, the finding of the learned Judge of the Reference Court that the land under reference would have fetched Rs. 700/- Per Sq.R that too in 1986 can not be said to be incorrect. 8] I am purposely ignoring the discussion in the impugned judgment in respect of the trend in the increase of price of lands etc., because there is no need discuss such aspect unless specific evidence is brought on record showing trend in market price during the relevant period. 6 FA.No.203 .05+3 9] In view of this, the appeals should, therefore, fail. Thus, the appeals stand dismissed. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) MTK/ok