1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 156 OF 2007 1. Deputy Collector & S.D.O. Ponda Sub Division, Ponda Goa. 2. Executive Engineer W. XVIII (R) Div. XVIII (R), P.W.D. Ponda Goa. ... Appellants V e r s u s Bhikaji Sardessai & Others Saibaba Sadan, Porvorim, Bardez Goa, ( Expired) through Lrs: 1. Shri Raghunath B. Sardessai, near New Water Tank, House No. 1000, New Vaddem, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa, 403 802. 2. Mrs. Subodh Shashikant Sardessai, Saibaba Sadan, Near Hotel Casino, Porvorim Goa. 3. Mrs. Anita Anil Sardessai, Behind Govt. High School, Near Saibaba Temple, New Vaddem, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa. 4. Shri Ashok B. Sardessai, Altess Manor, Flat No.307, Block'B', Caranzalem, Panaji Goa. 2 5. Shri Dilip B. Sardessai, GA/4, Ribandar Residency, Ribandar, Panvel Goa. 6. Shri Laxminarayan (Baban) B. Sardessai, 7, Municipal Complex, St. Inez, Panaji Goa. 7. Mrs. Indira A. Raikar, Laxmi Vihar, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa. 8. Mrs. Nila Sajguiri, H.No.220, Sailant Sankaole, Goa. 9. Mrs. Sushita Nadkarni, Housing Board Colony, Margao Goa. 10.Mrs. Uttara Bale, Near Progress Garage, Ponda Goa. 11.Mrs. Anuradha R. Kamat, C-7, Datta Apartment, Behind Damianti, Porvorim Goa. ... Respondents Mr. M. Salkar, Additinal Government Advocate for the Appellants. Ms. A. Valadares, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 6. Mr. R. G. Ramani, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 7 to 11. CORAM : A. S. OKA & F. M. REIS, JJ. DATED: 9 th AUGUST, 2010 3 ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per A. S. OKA, J ) The State of Goa and another have taken an exception to the judgment and award dated 13th October, 2006 passed by the District Court in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) being Land Acquisition Case No. 90/1998. The reference was made at the instance of the Respondents who are the Applicants in the Land Acquisition Case. The acquisition relates to an area of 5900 square metres from the survey No. 204/2 at Ponda Village. The acquisition was for construction of Ponda by-pass road from Farmagudi to Dhavali via Kashimath Khadpaband and Kapileshwari. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act was published on 7th November, 1991. By an award under Section 11 of the said Act, the market value of Rs.45/- per square metre was offered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. In the reference, the Respondents made a claim of market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 225/- per square metre and Rs.50,000/- for the trees. By the impugned judgment and award, the reference was partly allowed and the market value was enhanced to Rs. 144/- per square metre alongwith all statutory benefits. 4 2. The learned Additional Government Advocate has taken us through the impugned judgment and award. He pointed out that one of the documents on which the reliance is placed is the judgment and award dated 21st April, 2006 in Land Acquisition Case No. 91/1998. He pointed out that a copy of the said judgment was produced at the fag end of the trial at the instance of the Respondents. He invited our attention to the said judgment and award. He pointed out that in the said judgment and award, the Reference Court has relied upon the judgment and award in Land Acquisition Case No. 119/98 wherein the market value at the rate of Rs. 144/- per square metre was awarded. He pointed out that the said judgment and award in Land Acquisition Case No. 91/1998 ( Exhibit D-54 ) was produced by the Respondents ( Applicants in the reference ) on the date on which the final arguments were advanced. He submitted that apart from the fact that there is no evidence of comparability of the acquired land with the land subject matter of the award at Exhibit D-54, the Appellants could not get an opportunity to meet the said document. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 7 to 11 pointed out that in the award under Section 11 which was subject matter of the said judgment at Exhibit D-54, the Land 5 Acquisition Officer had offered the market value of Rs. 15/- per square metre from which the reference Court enhanced the market value to Rs. 144/- per square metre. He pointed out that in fact in the present case, the market value offered by the Land Acquisition Officer was at the rate of Rs. 45/- per square metre and, therefore, the original Applicants were entitled to the market value at the rate exceeding Rs.144/- per square metre. 4. We have given careful consideration to the submissions. Perusal of the impugned judgment and award and in particular paragraph 12 thereof shows that the Reference Court relied upon the said judgment and award at Exhibit D-54 which relates to the land admeasuring 2225 square metres. The said judgment and award at Exhibit D-54 is based on judgment and award in Land Acquisition Case No. 119/98, the land subject matter of which was also acquired for construction of Ponda by- pass road. In the said case, the Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the market value of Rs. 35/- per square metre and the District Court has enhanced the same to Rs. 144/- per square metre. Perusal of the Rozanama of the Land Acquisition Case shows that the said judgment and award at Exhibit D-54 was produced on the day on which the final arguments in reference were heard. The said 6 document appears to have been produced on 23rd August, 2006 when the case was fixed for further arguments. After taking the said document on record, the case was adjourned for judgment. There is no evidence adduced by the original Applicants as regards the comparability of the land subject matter of the said award at Exhibit D-54. The learned Reference Court has straight away considered the said document and on the basis of the same has fixed the market value at Rs. 144/- per square metre. As the impugned award is based on the said document and as no evidence was adduced on the said document, an opportunity deserves to be granted to the parties to lead evidence as regards the comparability of the land subject matter of the award at Exhibit D-54. Hence, an order of remand will have to be passed. 5. Hence, we pass the following order :- O R D E R (A) The impugned judgment and award dated 13th October, 2006 is quashed and set aside and the Land Acquisition Case No. 90/1998 is restored to the file of the Reference Court. It will be open for the Respondents ( original Applicants ) to adduce further oral and documentary evidence on the judgment and award 7 in Land Acquisition Case No. 91/1998 at Exhibit D-54. It is obvious that even the Appellants will be entitled to lead evidence in rebuttal. (B) After allowing the parties to lead additional evidence, the Reference Court shall decide the reference afresh in accordance with law. (C) The reference shall be decided afresh by the end of April, 2011. (D) Appeal is partly allowed in above terms with no order as to costs. A. S. OKA, J F. M. REIS, J at*