1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 12 OF 1994 The State of Maharashtra, Through Spl. Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon. ...Appellant. Versus Tembhu Supadu Pandhare, (deceased) L.Rs. 1. Bhyagwat Tembhu Pandhre, Age 35 yrs., Occu. Agriculture, 2. Krushna Tembhu Panchare, Age 27 yrs., Occu. Agriculture, 3. Chindu Tembhu Panchre, Age 40 yrs., Occu. Agriculture, 4. Namdeo Tembhu Panchre, Age 45 yrs., Occu. Agriculture, 5. Gangubai Madhavrao, Age 30 yrs., Occu. Agriculture, 6. Chandrabai Bhimrao, Age 32 yrs., Occu. Agriculture, All R/o. Sheri, Tal. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon. ....Respondents. Shri. N.H. Borade, A.G.P. for the appellant/State. Shri. S.V. Chandole Advocate h/f. Shri. V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate for the respondents. 2 CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 22nd JULY, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. This is an appeal by State, challenging the judgment and order dated 4th of May 1990 passed by the learned Judge of the Reference Court, Jalgaon in Land Acquisition Reference No. 299/1989 granting compensation of Rs.94,400/- to the respondent/claimant for acquisition of land i.e. Gat No. 152/2 admeasuring 2.12 hector situated at village Sheri, Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon (hereinafter referred to as "the land in question"). 2. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 18.02.1982 for the acquisition of land in question for the purpose of percolation tank. The declaration under section 6 was made. The possession was taken earlier on 10.3.1981. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon passed an award dated 26.8.1985 awarding total compensation of Rs. 16,062.20. The claimant preferred Land Acquisition Reference No. 299/1989. The learned Reference Court, Jalgaon who tried the same, granted total compensation of Rs.95,400/- to the respondent/claimant for acquisition of the land in question. The State has preferred this appeal challenging the enhancement of compensation granted by the Reference Court. 3. The learned Judge of the Reference Court framed issued. The 3 respondent/claimant led his own evidence as P.W. 1 Bhagwat and relied upon Exh. 14, the 7/12 extract of the land in respect of property Gat No. 152/2. The claim of the respondent/claimant was for an amount of Rs. 59,360/- and in support of it, he relied upon Exh. 13 the sale deed dated 28.3.1970 in respect of Gat No. 64 of village Pahur. The Reference Court relied upon the oral evidence and the sale deed at Exh. 13 and determined the market value of the land in question at Rs.45,000/- per hector and accordingly granted total compensation of Rs. 95,400/- to the respondent/claimant for acquisition of his land admeasuring 2.12 hector. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader Shri. N.H. Borade appearing for the appellant contended that the Reference Court could not have relied upon the sale deed Exh. 13, particularly, when the claimant in his cross examination has admitted that the price of land at Pahur (in respect of Exh. 13) is five times more than the price of the other lands. The learned counsel also pointed out that in the cross examination, the claimant has stated that there is a public road which goes from Gat No. 64 and Bagayat crops are taken in it. It has further been pointed out that Pahur village is bigger village than Jamner Taluka where the land in question is situated. According to the learned counsel, the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was just, proper considering the situation potentiality of the land and the circumstances surrounding to it. 4 5. I have gone through the evidence of P.W. 1 Bhagwat and perused the sale deed Exh. 13 dated 28.3.1970. The price reflected in the sale deed Exh. 13 is of Rs. one lakh per hector. There are no other sale instances placed on record by either of the parties. In answer to a question regarding the distance of land in question from the land in Exh. 13, the P.W. 1 has denied that the distance is of 10 k.m. Taking in to consideration the entire evidence and location, the Reference Court has recorded the finding that the compensation at the rate of Rs.45,000/- per hector shall determined the market value of the land and is most reasonable. Although the price of the land in Exh. 13 is shown to be Rs. one lakh per hector, the Reference Court has granted Rs. 45,000/- per hector which appears to be just and reasonable. I do not find any infirmity in the determination of the market value by the Reference Court. The Reference Court has also passed an award granting interest at the rate of 15% which also cannot be said to suffer from any infirmity. 6. In view of the aforesaid position, there is no merit in the instant appeal. The same, therefore, stands dismissed with costs. [ R.K. DESHPANDE, J. ] ssc/fa12.94