-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.70 OF 1991 APPEAL NO.70 OF 1991 APPEAL NO.70 OF 1991 WITH WITH WITH CROSS CROSS CROSS OBJECTION ST.NO.18638 OF 1991 OBJECTION ST.NO.18638 OF 1991 OBJECTION ST.NO.18638 OF 1991 The State of Maharashtra (through the Special Land Acquisition Officer ...Appellant vs. Krishna Raghunath Patil (since deceased through L.Rs.) 1. Smt.sunanda Krishna Patil 2. Shri Dhananjay Krishna Patil 3. Shri Hemraj Krishna Patil 4. Shri Radhuvir Krishna Patil 5. Shri Ratnakar Krishna Patil 6. Sau. Nanda Bhaskar Mhatre 7. Sau.Ratna Gurunath Pandit 8. Sau. Vidya Shubhanand Mhatre 9. Sau. Neeta Sanjay Patil ...Respondents Shri S.N.Gawade, A.G.P. for the Appellant Shri Vijay Gharat and Shri D.K.Patil for the Respondent Nos.1 to 9. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE ON WHICH THE JUDGMENT IS RESERVED ; 17TH JANUARY 2008 DATE ON WHICH THE JUDGMENT IS RESERVED ; 17TH JANUARY 2008 DATE ON WHICH THE JUDGMENT IS RESERVED ; 17TH JANUARY 2008 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE JUDGMENT: 18TH MARCH, 2008. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE JUDGMENT: 18TH MARCH, 2008. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE JUDGMENT: 18TH MARCH, 2008. JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT: 1. Heard learned A.G.P. for the Appellant and the learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 to 9. The challenge in this Appeal is to the Judgment and Award dated 11th September 1989 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Raigad. The impugned Judgment and Award is 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 original Respondent. The acquisition relates to the agricultural lands at village Bhendkhal, Taluka Uran, District -2- Raigad which were notified by a notification dated 3rd February 1970 under section 4 of the said Act. The purpose of acquisition was for setting up a satellite city of Navi Mumbai. These were three awards under section 11 of the said Act. Two awards were made on 3rd September 1983 and one award was made on 5th September 1983 offering the market value at the rate of Rs.7200/- per acre. The reference Court by the impugned Judgment and Award fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter. In the reference, the Respondent claimed market value at the rate of Rs.80,000/- per acre. In the cross objection, the Respondent has claimed market value at the rate of Rs.20/- per square meter. 2. The submission of the learned A.G.P. appearing for the Appellant is that apart from the report of the valuer and the evidence of the said valuer, the original Claimant did not lead any evidence by producing the comparable sale instances. It is submitted that at the relevant time, the acquired lands were agricultural lands having no potential for non agricultural use. 3. The learned Advocate for the Respondent invited my attention to the evidence of the witnesses as well as documentary evidence on record. He invited my attention to a certified copy of the sale deed dated 30th September 1967 relating to the property at village Mhatavali within the limits of Uran Municipal Council. He submitted that the said -3- document ought to have been exhibited in view of section 51-A of the said Act. He invited my attention to the agreement of lease executed between the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. in favour of Maharashtra State Electricity Board on 20th March 1981. He submitted that the market value awarded by the Reference Court is on the lower side. He submitted that the cross objection deserves to be allowed. 4. It will be necessary to refer to the evidence adduced by the original Respondent-claimant. He stated in his deposition that the acquired lands were situated at the distance of 100 meters from Gaothan of village Bhendkhal. He stated that Uran Panvel Road is situated on the northern side of the acquired lands and Uran Khopata road is on the southern side of the acquired lands. He stated that the acquired lands were at the distance of about one and half kilometre away from the said two roads. He stated that there are about 10 villages around Uran Town including the village Bhendkhal. He stated that the villages are about one and half kilometre from Uran. He stated that in the year 1970, there was already a proposal for establishment of the Nhava Sheva Port at Uran. He stated that all the facilities such as school, hospital, Bank, railway transport were available at that time at Uran and there were ferry launches for travelling from Uran to Mumbai. The respondent was extensively cross examined. In the cross examination he stated that the total area of revenue village -4- Bhendkhal is 960 acres. Out of that area, area of 100 acres was used for salt manufacturing. He stated that there is a creek at the distance of 2 kilometres from the acquired lands. There was was protective bund erected near the creek having length of 3 to 3 1/2 kilometres. He admitted that there was no evidence on record to show that he had applied for permission to use the acquired land for non agricultural purpose. 5. The second witness examined by the respondent is one Mohamad Khataulla Mohamad Husain Tungekar. He was a trustee of Hajrat Pir Saheb Darga. He deposed that the trust was the owner of the land bearing survey No.84/P at village Nagaon which was situated at the distance of 2 and 1/2 kilometres from Uran. He stated that on the request made by the Oil and Natural Gas Commission, he had let out a portion of the said land at the lease rent calculated at the rate of Rs.5/- per sq.meter. However, in the cross examination he admitted that the lease was made in the year 1982 i.e. nearly 12 years after the relevant date. Hence, the said evidence may not be material. 6. Shri Jeevan Narayan Kulkarni, a valuer stepped into witness box. He stated that the village Bhendkhal was proposed to be included in the limits of Uran Municipal council. He pointed out that under the draft regional plan the lands surrounding the acquired lands were shown for -5- industrial use. He deposed about the location of village Uran. He proved the map at Exh.26 in the evidence. He also admitted that the village Bhendkhal is at the distance of 7 kilometres from Uran. He stated that the distance of 2.5 kilometres stated in his the report between the acquired lands and the Uran is the distance as a crow flies. According to him, the market value of the acquired land on the relevant date was Rs.15/- per sq. meter. 7. At this stage, it will be necessary to refer to the background note regarding valuation of the lands for New Bombay project relating to the lands at villages Bhendkhal and Bokadvira which was prepared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Metro Centre II, Uran. The said report dated 29th November 1979 was produced by the Appellant-State of Maharashtra along with the list at Exh.29. As the said report has been produced by the Appellant, the same can be read in evidence. In the said note, it is stated that the village Bhendkhal is in the outskirts of village Bokadvira. It is stated that the village Bhendkhal was at the distance of 2.5 kilometres on Uran Panvel highway from the limits of Uran. The said valuation note records that in the year 1968 the Uran Municipal Council had submitted a proposal to the Government of Maharashtra for extending the limits of the said council by including the village Bhendkhal and other villages. The said valuation note records that the area of village Bhendkhal carry an urban element and therefore, the said area has non -6- agricultural potential. Thus, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has himself referred to the proposal of the year 1968 of including the village Bhendkhal in the area of Uran Municipal Council. Moreover, it is stated by the Special Land Acquisition Officer himself in the said note that the village Bhendkhal carries an urban element and non agricultural potential. This statement can be taken as admission on the part of the Appellant. 8. It will be necessary to refer to the findings recorded by the reference court. In paragraph 18 of the Judgment, the reference court has held thus : "18. Shri Kulkarni valuer in his report mentioned that District and Senior Division Court Alibag in land reference cases awarded land rate varying from Rs.13/- to Rs.25/- per square meter. In L.A.R.No.4/1985 for Survey No.532 of Panvel which is depending upon the situation of the land. Senior Division Court awarded land rate at Rs.15/- per square metre, which is confirmed by F.A.No.449/1985 by Bombay High Court. In L.A.R.No.79/1981 the Court has awarded the rate of Rs.15/- per square meter which has been confirmed in F.A.No.1123/1985. This land was enjoying the Railway facility as well as road facility. In the recent High Court decision dated 10/3/1987 the land rate of lands at village Kalundre, Panvel, Kamothe, Kalamboli at Rs.22.70 -7- p.s.m. Rs.18/- p.s.m. Rs.16.20 p.s.m. Rs.16 p.s.m. and Rs.15/- p.s.m. have been awarded. The lands which are situated away from Panvel like lands at village Ambetarikhar have been awarded the rate of Rs.15/- per square meter in L.A.R.No.24/1982. These are law lying lands away from the High way. Considering all these situation, it would be in fitness of these things the land rate Rs.10/- per square would be just and proper. Thus, after taking into consideration level, situation and prepare valuation note of the acquired land, land rate of Rs.10/- per square meter for which claimant is held entitled to get the enhanced compensation from the opponent..." 9. Large number of lands at the said village Bhendkhal were notified on 3rd February 1970 along with the lands at villages Kalundre, Panvel, Kamothe, Ulwe, Targhar, Taloja etc. in Taluka Panvel District Raigad for acquisition for the New Bombay Project. In view of the note of the Special Land Acquisition Officer which is placed on record, it is obvious that the acquired lands on the relevant date had N.A. potentiality and in fact two years prior to the date of the aforesaid notification under section 4 of the said Act, there was a proposal to include village Bhendkhal within the limits of Uran Municipal Council. In case of lands at village Ulwe and Sonkhar which are situated in Taluka Panvel notified under the same notification, this Court has fixed the market value -8- of Rs.12/- per square meter. These two villages are much closer to the major town of Panvel than the village Bhendkhal. 10. The sale deed relied upon by the Respondents is not relevant as it relates to a house property within the limits of Uran Municipal Council. The Agreement of lease relied upon is also not relevant as it is of 20th March 1981. 11. The estimation of the market value under section 23 of the said Act always involves an element of guess work. In the present case, the market value arrived at by the reference court is on the basis of consideration of the evidence on record and especially N.A.potentiality of the acquired land. Taking an overall view of the matter, it is difficult to find fault with the view taken by the reference court that the market value of the acquired land was Rs.10/- per sq. meter on the relevant date. It must be noted that there is no evidence available on record in respect of sale of comparable lands from the same village. Hence, no case is made out for grant of enhancement in market value. Therefore, both the Appeal and the Cross Objection deserve to be dismissed. As the awards in case of the acquired lands made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer were in September 1982, there cannot be any dispute as regards the grant of statutory benefits. 11. Hence I pass the following order : -9- i) Appeal is dismissed. The Appellant will pay costs of the Appeal to the Respondents. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE