-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 123 OF 2004 1. Deputy Collector, (L.A.) Margao, Goa. 2. The Executive Engineer, WD – VI ( R & B), PWD, Fatorda, Margao – Goa. …... Appellants V e r s u s Smt. Maria Aurelia Faleiro e Lima Pereira, House no.1435, Magilwaddo, Near Maria Hall, P.O. Benaulim, Salcete, Goa, (since deceased), Represented by L.R.: 1a) Shri Antonio de Lima Pereira, alias Antonio Vicente de Lima Pereira, r/o. 3rd floor, Confralia Building, Jose Falcao Road, Near Immaculate Conception Church, Panaji. ….. Respondent Mr. G. Shirodkar, Government Advocate for the Appellants. None for the Respondent. CORAM: F. M. REIS, J. DATE : 16 th September, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT The above Appeal challenges the Judgment and Award dated 29.11.2003, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, South Goa, Margao, in Land Acquisition Case no. 14/2001. -2- 2. By a Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act'), dated 06.01.1993, published in the Official Gazette on 26.04.1993, land belonging to the Respondent admeasuring an area of 125 square metres from survey no. 389/2 and 130 square metres from survey no. 388/7, situated at Benaulim Village, was sought to be acquired for the widening and black topping of road from Colva to Varca Junction. By an Award under Section 11 of the said Act, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.20/- per square metre. Being dissatisfied with the said compensation, the Respondents filed a reference under Section 18 of the said Act for enhancement of compensation and claimed an amount of Rs.473/- per square metre for the land acquired. By Judgment and Award dated 29.11.2003, the learned Addl. District Judge, South Goa, Margao, fixed the market value of the land acquired at the rate of Rs.30/- per square metre. 3. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Award, the Appellants have preferred the present Appeal. 4. The learned Government Advocate, appearing for the Appellants has assailed the impugned Judgment and submitted that the land acquired had no comparability with the sale instances produced by the Respondent. He further submitted that the Respondent has failed to establish that the amount offered by the Land Acquisition Officer was inadequate. He further pointed out that the land which was acquired was coming within the road -3- widening area and, as such, the same had no development potentialities. The learned Government Advocate further pointed out that the Reference Court has erroneously relied upon the Award at exhibit 26 wherein the market value of land was fixed at the rate of Rs.30/- per square metre in Land Acquisition Case no. 3/2001. The learned Government Advocate further pointed out that the Reference Court has totally misdirected itself in fixing the market value of land and, as such, the impugned Judgment and Award deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5. The Respondent though served, failed to remain present nor represented by any Counsel. 6. Having heard the learned Government Advocate and on perusal of the record, the following point for determination arises in the present Appeal:- POINT FOR DETERMINATION 1. Whether the Reference Court was justified to fix the market value of the land acquired as on the date of Section 4 Notification at the rate of Rs.30/- per square metre ? 7. The Reference Court whilst disposing of the reference filed by the Respondent has essentially relied upon the Award passed in Land Acquisition Case no. 3/2001, which is at exhibit 26. The market value of the land acquired therein was fixed at Rs.30/- per square metre. The said Award -4- was produced by Rw.1-Prakash Naik, who had deposed on behalf of the Appellants herein. He had stated in his deposition that the subject matter of the land in the said case was situated towards the northern side of the land of the Respondent and it is at a distance of about 700 metres from the acquired land. He had also stated that the nature of the land of the Respondent is similar to the land which was subject matter of the said Land Acquisition Case no.3/2001. On the basis of the evidence adduced by the Appellants themselves, the Reference Court came to the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land was Rs.30/- per square metre. In fact, the Judgment passed in said Land Acquisition Case no. 3/2001, was the subject matter of First Appeal no. 25/2004. By Judgment dated 26.08.2010, the Appeal preferred by the Appellants came to be dismissed and the market value of Rs.30/- per square metre as fixed by the Reference Court for the land acquired therein was upheld. There is no reason to award a different amount to the Respondent herein. As such, there is no infirmity in the findings of the Reference Court to the effect that the market value of the acquired land is Rs.30/- per square metre for the land acquired. The point for determination is answered accordingly. 8. As such, there is no merit in the Appeal and the same stands dismissed with no orders as to costs. F. M. REIS, J. arp/*