ash 1 fa-307.92 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.307 OF 1992 The State of Maharashtra & Another. .. Appellants Vs Omanna Ramchandra Patil & Others. .. Respondents -- Shri A.R. Patil, AGP for the Appellants. Shri S.M. Kamble h/f Shri A.P. Mundargi for Respondent Nos.1 to 6. -- CORAM ; A.S. OKA, J DATED : 20TH JULY, 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : . The Appellant–State of Maharashtra has taken an exception to the judgment and award dated 26th April, 1991 passed by the Reference Court in a Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”). The acquisition is in respect of the land bearing R.S. No.265/1, admeasuring 1-01 hectares from the village Tudaye, Taluka – Chandgad, District- Kolhapur. The notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act was published on 13th July, 1978. An award was made under Section 11 of the said Act on 19th December, 1983. As the said award was not accepted, at the instance of the Respondents, a reference was made ash 2 fa-307.92 under Section 18 of the said Act which was decided by the impugned judgment and award. The Reference Court has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.16,000/- per acre and has granted statutory benefits under Section 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the said Act. 2. The learned AGP appearing for the Appellants submitted that none of the sale instances relied upon by the Respondent are in respect of the comparable lands. He pointed out that the Trial Court committed an error by relying upon the Sale Deed at Exhibit – 18 which was only in respect of the area of 26-3 Ares and moreover, it was a post notification sale. He submitted that the market value has been fixed on the basis of the conjectures and surmises. 3. I have considered the submissions. The Reference Court relied upon a Sale Deed dated 31st December, 1979 in respect of the land admeasuring 26.3 Ares bearing R.S. No.440/2 of the same village. The Sale Deed was proved by the Respondents by examining the Vendor. The evidence on record shows that the said Sale Deed was also in respect of an agricultural land. The witness Kallappa deposed that the land subject matter of the Sale Deed was of the same quality as of that of the acquired land. It is true that the sale deed is a post notification sale deed. Merely because it is a post notification sale deed, it cannot be kept out of consideration especially when the same relates ash 3 fa-307.92 to a comparable land from the same village. The Sale Deed was executed one year and four months after the relevant date. During the span of one year, there is bound to be some escalation in the price of the lands. Moreover, the area of acquired land held by the Respondents is 84 Ares. The area of the land subject matter of sale deed is only 26.3 Ares. The market value reflected from the said Sale Deed is R.16,000/- per acre. Some deduction will have to be made on account of largess of the area of the acquired land. Additional deduction is required to be made on account of the fact that there is a gap of one year and four months between the relevant date and the said Sale Deed. Thus, 20% deduction will have to be made. Accordingly, after deducting 20%, the market value will have to be brought down to Rs.12,800/- per acre and to that extent, the Appeal will have to be allowed. 4. Hence, I pass the following order: (a) The impugned judgment and award is modified. The market value of the acquired land shall be Rs. 12,800/- per acre. (b) Rest of the award including the statutory benefits is hereby confirmed. ash 4 fa-307.92 (c) The Appeal is partly allowed in above terms with no orders as to costs. ( A.S. OKA, J )