:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1397 OF 2004 Abdul Aziz Mohammad Husen Patel, since deceased through his legal heirs. ..Appellants Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Panvel ..Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 1539 OF 2006 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6420 OF 2005 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1014 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra SLAP Metro Centre Panvel Raigad ..Appellant Vs. Abdul Aziz Mohammad Husen Patel (deceased) through legal heirs 1. Shri Mukhtyar Aziz Patel and ors. ..Respondents Mr. Ajay Khaire i/by M/s. M.S. Bodhanwala & Co. for appellants in F.A. No. 1397/04 and for respondents in F.A. No. 1539/06. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, AGP for respondent in F.A. No. 1397/04 and for appellant in F.A. No. 1539/06. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. Dated: August 26, 2008. Dated: August 26, 2008. Dated: August 26, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: :2: 1. Both these appeals impugn the award passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Alibag on 27/8/2004 thereby allowing L.A.R. No. 30 of 2003 partly. The Claimants’ appeal prays for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Reference Court, whereas the appeal filed by the State questions the market rate fixed by the Reference Court at Rs.15/- per sq.mtr. 2. The Reference Court held that the Claimants shall be entitled for the compensation at the rate of Rs.15/- per sq.mtr. in respect of the subject land acquired, after deducting the compensation already paid. In addition, the component of 12% p.a. has been granted under Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) from the date of the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act till the award or taken possession, whichever is earlier. The Claimants have also been granted 30% solatium on the market value under Section 23(2) of the Act. Interest under Section 28 of the Act has also been granted on the amount of solatium as well as the additional component. :3: 3. Mrs. Mulekar, the learned AGP, has placed before us a copy of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this court in First Appeal No. 758 of 1988 arising from the award passed by the learned District Judge, Alibag in L.A.R. No. 189 of 1986 on 18/4/1987. She submitted that the land acquired and covered by LAR No. 189 of 1986 and LAR No. 30 of 2003 is from the same village i.e. village Wadghar in Taluka Panvel of Raigad District. Notification under Section 4 as issued on 3/2/1970 covered both the lands. In the instant case the Land Acquisition Officer passed the award on 22/11/1980, whereas in LAR No. 189 of 1986 the Land Acquisition Officer’s award was passed on 22/2/1985. By relying upon the judgment of the Division Bench, Mrs. Mulekar submitted that the market value fixed by the Reference Court at Rs.15/- per sq.mtr. is required to be reduced to Rs.12.50 per sq.mtr. and the Claimants will not be entitled for additional component of 12% under Section 23(1-A) of the Act. She further stated that the Reference Court has not considered the important component of the expenditure to be incurred on :4: development of the land. It was pointed out that in F.A. No. 758 of 1988 the Division Bench has fixed the development charges at 20% and directed to deduct the same from the market value fixed at Rs.12.50 per sq.mtr. 4. In the Appeal filed by the Claimants, they have prayed for the market value to be fixed at Rs.50/- per sq.mtr. with all other statutory benefits like 12% component, solatium and interest on both under Section 28 of the Act. 5. In connected references and the First Appeals arising there from we have followed the judgment rendered in F.A. No. 758 of 1988 and we do not find any reason to take a different view in respect of the land of the Claimants in the present appeals. As noted earlier, all the lands are from the same village and covered by a common notification issued under Section 4 of the Act. It is evident that though the impugned award was passed on 27/8/2004, the learned Government Pleader appearing in LAR No. 30 of 2003 did not place before the Reference Court a copy of the :5: judgment dated 3/7/2001 rendered by this court in F.A. No. 758 of 1988 and, therefore, the Reference Court could not have the benefit of the said judgment fixing the market value at Rs.12.50 per sq.mtr. 6. In these obtaining circumstances, the appeal filed by the Claimants must fail and the same is hereby dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the State Government succeeds partly. Hence, we pass the following order:- (a) The Claimants are entitled to get the market value of the land covered under LAR No.30 of 2003 at the rate of Rs.12.50 per sq.mtr. (b) The development charges of 20% shall be deducted from the said market value while calculating the compensation amount payable to the Claimants. (c) The Claimants are not entitled for the :6: additional component of 12% under Section 23(1-A) of the Act in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Kashiben Bhikabai and ors. vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and anr. [(2002) 2 SCC 605]. However, the Claimants are entitled for interest under Section 28 of the Act on the solatium as well as the market value after deducting development charges of 20%. (d) The award passed by the Reference Court stands modified accordingly. 7. Civil Applications do not survive and same are disposed as such. (D.B. Bhosale,J.) (D.B. Bhosale,J.) (D.B. Bhosale,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)