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.835 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.835 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.835 OF 1992 The State of Maharashtra )..Appellant Versus 1. Kashinath Nathu Katkari ) since deceased through his heirs: ) ) 1A.Bayamabai Kashinath Katkari, ) wife, Age:40 yrs., ) ) 1B.Ms Meena Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:14 yrs., ) ) 1C.Ms Maniha Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:12 yrs., ) ) 1D.Ms Sushila Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:10 yrs., ) ) 1E.Ms Asha Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:6 yrs., ) ) Nos.1A to 1E are minors, through ) their guardian mother responent No.1A. ) ) All residing at Mouja Vadghar, ) Grampanchayat House No.504, ) College Road, Taluka Panvel, ) District Raigad. ) ) 2. Bhagwan Nathu Katkari, ) ) 3. Shri Bharat Sitaram Katkari. )..Respondents --- Ms G.P.Mulekar, A.G.P for the Appellant. Shri D.S.Sawant for the Respondents. --- WITH WITH WITH FIRST FIRST FIRST APPEAL NO.359 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.359 OF 1992 APPEAL NO.359 OF 1992 1. Kashinath Nathu Katkari ) since deceased through his heirs: ) ) 1A.Bayamabai Kashinath Katkari, ) wife, Age:40 yrs., ) : 2 : 2 : 2 : ) 1B.Ms Meena Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:14 yrs., ) ) 1C.Ms Maniha Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:12 yrs., ) ) 1D.Ms Sushila Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:10 yrs., ) ) 1E.Ms Asha Kashinath Katkari, ) Daughter, Age:6 yrs., ) ) Nos.1A to 1E are minors, through ) their guardian mother responent No.1A. ) ) All residing at Mouja Vadghar, ) Grampanchayat House No.504, ) College Road, Taluka Panvel, ) District Raigad. ) ) 2. Bhagwan Nathu Katkari, ) ) 3. Shri Bharat Sitaram Katkari. )..Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra )..Respondent --- Shri D.S.Sawant for the Appellants. Ms G.P.Mulekar, A.G.P for the Respondent. --- CORAM CORAM CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS RESERVED : 17TH JANUARY, 2008. ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS RESERVED : 17TH JANUARY, 2008. ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS RESERVED : 17TH JANUARY, 2008. DATE DATE DATE ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCED: 07TH ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCED: 07TH ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCED: 07TH MARCH, 2008. MARCH, 2008. MARCH, 2008. ORAL ORAL ORAL JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT: 1. These appeals can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment and order. The appeals take exception to the same judgment and award dated 08th August, 1991 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Raigad at Alibag in Land Acquisition Reference No.517 of : 3 : 3 : 3 : 1987. By the said judgment and award, a reference made under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) has been partly allowed. 2. The acquisition relates to lands at village Wadghar, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad. The said lands were notified for acquisition under section 4 of the said Act on 03rd February, 1970 for the public purpose of setting up of satellite city of Navi Mumbai. Award under section 11 of the said Act was made on 22nd September, 1986. In the reference, the claim of the claimants was for market value at the rate of Rs.20/- per sq meter. By the impugned judgment and award, the reference Court has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq meter. The reference Court also granted statutory benefits. The First Appeal No.835 of 1992 has been preferred by the State Government praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned award. The First Appeal No.359 of 1992 has been preferred by the claimants for seeking enhancement in market value. 3. The learned advocate appearing for the claimants placed reliance on various decisions of this Court arising from an Award made under section 18 of the said Act relating to the acquired lands at village Wadghar which were notified for acquisition under the same : 4 : 4 : 4 : notification under section 4 of the said Act. He submitted that the market value ought to have been more than Rs.15/- per sq meter. The learned A.G.P submitted that there was no evidence adduced by the claimants for justifying the grant of market value at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq meter. She, therefore, submitted that the impugned judgment and award deserves to be quashed and set aside. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions. It will be necessary to refer to a decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 03rd July, 2001 (Coram:P.S.Patankar and P.V.Kakade, JJ) in First Appeal No.758 of 1988 (The Indian Standard Metal Company Ltd Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer). The said appeal arose out of the judgment and award made in a reference under section 18 of the said Act relating to a land at village Wadghar which was notified under the same notification under section 4 for the same public purpose. 5. Considering the various sale instances and other material on record, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land was Rs.12.50/- per sq meter. The Division Bench considered the location of village Wadghar and availability of various facilities in the said village : 5 : 5 : 5 : at the relevant time. 6. It is an admitted position that the decision of the Division Bench has attained finality in the sense that the said decision has not been challenged either by the State Government or by the acquiring body. 7. Perusal of the evidence on record shows that the claimants have examined one Shri Jeevan Narayan Kulkarni, a valuer. The report submitted by the valuer was duly proved in his evidence. A map prepared by the said expert witness was admitted in evidence and was marked as Exhibit 25. The said map shows that the acquired land was situated in the close vicinity of Panvel-Uran State Highway. The report at Exhibit 26 and evidence of Shri Kulkarni discloses that Panvel municipal limit was very close to the boundary of village Vadghar. Considering the evidence relating to the location of the land, it is apparent that the acquired land is on par with the land subject matter of the decision of the Division Bench in the case of Indian Standard Metal Company Ltd (supra). Infact the Division Bench has fixed a market value of Rs.12.50/- per sq meter for a fairly large area of 12,13,130 meters whereas the area of the acquired land subject matter of present Appeals is 21090 sq meter. Hence, market value of the acquired land will have to be fixed at the rate : 6 : 6 : 6 : of 12.50 sq meter. There is no dispute as regards grant of statutory benefits. 8. Hence, I pass the following order: (i) First Appeal No.835 of 1992 is dismissed with no orders as to costs. (ii) First Appeal No.359 of 1992 is partly allowed. The market value of the acquired lands is fixed at the rate of Rs.12.50/- sq meter. In addition to the market value, the claimants will be entitled to the statutory benefits under section 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants will be entitled to proportionate costs of the reference as well as First Appeal No.359 of 1992. (iii) The Reference Court will complete the exercise of calculating the compensation payable to the claimants within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the writ of this judgment. (iv) Writ to be sent down immediately. : 7 : 7 : 7 : Judge. Judge. Judge.