1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL NO.590 OF 1992 1) Dinkar Govindrao Almale, Age-25 years, Occu:Agriculture, Tq-Omerga, Dist-Osmanabad. 2) Lalasaheb Govindrao Almale, Age-22 years, Through Power of Attorney, Yeshwant Govindrao Almale, Age-32 years, R/o-Khed, Tq-Omerga, Dist-Osmanabad. .... APPELLANTS. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through: The Collector, Osmanabad. .... RESPONDENT. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.591 OF 1992 Vithal Dhondiram Kabra, (Deceased through L.Rs:) 1) Kaushalyabai Vithaldas Kabra, Age-75 years, Occ:Household, 2 2) Rameshwar Vithaldas Kabra, Age-50 years, Occu:Business, 3) Walchand Vithaldas Kabra, Age-47 years, Occu:Service, 4) Fulchand Vithaldas Kabra, Age-45 years, Occu:Service, 5) Vishnudas Vithaldas Kabra, Age-41 years, Occu:Business, 6) Hanumandas Vithaldas Kabra, Age-35 years, Occu:Business, 7) Omprakash Vithaldas Kabra, Age-30 years, Occu:Business, All R/o-Khed, Tq-Lohara (Omerga), District-Osmanabad. .... APPELLANTS. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through: The Collector, Osmanabad. .... RESPONDENT. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.592 OF 1992 1) Shankar Narayan Almale, Age-33 years, Occu:Agriculture, 2) Mahatmaji Narayan Almale Age-33 years, Occu:Agriculture, 3) Dilip Narayan Almale, Age-22 years, Occu:Agriculture, 3 All R/o-Khed, Tq-Omerga, Dist-Osmanabad. .... APPELLANTS. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through: The Collector, Osmanabad. .... RESPONDENT. ... Mr.V.M. Maney Advocate for the Appellants in all the Appeals. Mr.M.L. Dharashive Advocate for Respondent - State in all the Appeals. ... CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE : 9TH JUNE, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. All these First Appeals can be disposed of by common Judgment as the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act as well as award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short S.L.A.O. ) is common. Not only that the Reference Court also decided three References by common Judgment on the basis of common evidence. 4 2. These three First Appeals preferred by original claimants against the common Judgment and award dated 5th October, 1989 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad. In these cases, the S.L.A.O. issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 11th October, 1982 for acquiring claimants land from village Khed, Taluka- Omerga,District-Osmanabad for Lower Terna Project. After following due process of law, the S.L.A.O. declared award dated 31st March, 1984 and awarded compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.11,000/- per Hector. Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the S.L.A.O., the Appellants / original claimants preferred Reference under Section 18 the Land Acquisition Act and claimed enhanced compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.60,000/- per acre i.e. @ Rs.1,50,000/- per Hector. The Reference Court by its Judgment and award dated 5th October, 1989, awarded enhanced compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per Hector. Learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Reference Court erred in coming to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled 5 compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per Hector and not Rs.60,000/- per acre i.e. @ Rs.1,50,000/- per Hector. 3. Learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Reference Court should have seen that the first sale instance dated 30th March, 1983 produced and proved by the Appellants / original claimants was in respect of 96 R s of land sold for Rs.28,000/- i.e. @ Rs.29,166/- per Hector. The sale instance dated 30th March, 1983, has been proved in L.A.R. No.48 of 1995 arising out of the acquisition of Lower Terna Project. It is further submitted that actually there was an agreement for sale one year before the date of sale i.e. 30th March, 1983 which comes to March, 1982 which has also been proved in the present Land Acquisition Reference. Learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Reference Court should have seen that the acquired land was just about 500 ft. away from the land in transaction produced as sale instance. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the second sale instance produced and proved by the Appellants was in respect of 44 R s of land from village Mukne and was sold for Rs.11,000/- i.e. @ Rs. 6 25,000/- per Hector in the year 1983. He submitted that though the sale instance was from village Mukne, village Mukne, Khed, Nagur, Sastur and other villages from where the land about 9000 Hectors was acquired for Lower Terna Project, are situated within the vicinity of each other and separating distance is not more than 1 to 3 Kms. from each other. He submitted that considering these facts, at least Reference Court should have granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre. He further pointed out that though the Appellants- claimants have claimed Rs.60,000/- per acre in their Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, they restricted their claim in the present First Appeals at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.P. for Respondent  State, vehemently opposed the present Appeals on the ground that Appellants failed to produce any cogent evidence to show that they are entitled enhanced compensation in respect of the acquired land. He further submitted that the Reference Court after considering the sale instance on record, rightly held that the claimants are entitled 7 compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per Hector. On the basis of these submissions, learned A.G.P. submitted that there is no merit in all these First Appeals and the same are liable to be dismissed with costs. 5. The details of the lands acquired in all these three First Appeals are as under: First Appeal No. Land Survey No. Area of acquired land 590 of 1992 S. No. 3/A S. No. 4/A S. No.62/4 5 Hector 40 Rs 1 Hector 48 Rs 0 Hector 74 Rs 591 of 1992 S. No.9 14 Hectors 13 Rs 592 of 1992 S. No.3/B S. No.4/B 5 Hectors 43 Rs 1 Hector 49 Rs 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the point for determination arise in the present case is : 8 POINT FOR DETERMINATION FINDING Whether the Appellants produced cogent evidence to show that they are entitled compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre i.e. @ Rs.50,000/- per Hector? YES. 7. Learned counsel for the Appellants fairly stated that in one of the First Appeal arising out from the same acquisition proceedings, this Court awarded compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre. He pointed out that in First Appeal No.387 of 1991, this Court by Oral Judgment dated 11th February, 2009, held that the claimants in that case are entitled compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre. In the present case the Appellants  claimants produced two sale instances dated 30th March, 1983 and 20th June, 1982 to justify the claim of the Appellants. These two sale instances also referred in the previous Judgment arising from the same 9 acquisition i.e. First Appeal No. 387 of 1991 (supra). There is no dispute that the agricultural land involved in First Appeal No.387 of 1991 was acquired for the same project i.e. Lower Terna Project. After hearing the parties, that Appeal has been decided and disposed by this Court holding that the value of the land involved in that Appeal was to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- per acre. Learned counsel for the Appellants has also invited my attention to the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India vs. Balram, reported in AIR 2004 S.C. Page 3981. The Supreme Court has held that in case of similar land, market value of the land on the basis of comparable instance of sale is reasonable. Bombay High Court in the matter of Bayaji Tatya Kalunge vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2007 (2) All M.R. Page 316 held that , if the land situated in same village acquired for same purpose under the same notification, then claimants are entitled to the compensation at the same rate on the ground of parity. 8. Having considered the material brought on record, earlier Judgment of this Court in First Appeal No.387 of 1991, in my view the claim of the claimants 10  Appellants that market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was Rs.20,000/- per acre, seems to be reasonable. Learned A.G.P. appearing for the Respondent  State is not disputing about the fact that land involved in First Appeal No. 387 of 1991 is acquired for the same project i.e. Lower Terna Project. Therefore, I hold that the Appellants  original claimants are entitled compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre i.e. @ Rs50,000/- per Hector. 9. Learned counsel for the Appellants pointed out that the Reference Court erred in holding that Appellants are entitled interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation and solatium thereon from the date of award i.e. 31/3/1984 till the depositing amount of enhanced compensation by the Respondent State in the Court. He submitted that as per the Land Acquisition Act, when the amount of compensation is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land, the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with interest thereon at the rate of nine per centum from the time of so taking 11 possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited and if the amount is not deposited within one year, then the claimants are entitled interest at the rate of 15% per annum till the payment or depositing the same in the Court. Learned A.G.P. also agrees that Appellants are entitled interest as per the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, the finding of Reference Court in respect of payment of interest is modified to the extent that the Appellants are entitled interest as per amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. 10. In view of these facts and circumstances, all the three First Appeals preferred by the original claimants are partly allowed holding that the Appellants  original claimants are entitled compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre i.e. @ Rs.50,000/- per Hector along with additional benefit as per amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act i.e. 12% component under Section 23 (1A), 30% solatium under Section 23 (2) and interest thereon. Appellants to pay deficit Court fees if any, within eight weeks from 12 today. 11. All the three First Appeals i.e. First Appeal Nos. 590 of 1992, 591 of 1992 and 592 of 1992 are partly allowed to the extent as stated above. [K.K. TATED] JUDGE. asb/JUN90/fa590.92