fast21433.09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21433 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Govind Shivaram Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21457 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Devidas Dattu Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21481 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Ambadas Nandrao Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENT fast21433.09 2 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21476 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Vishwanath Eknath Suryawanshi & others .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21470 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Babasaheb Dnyanoba Darphalkar & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21133 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Jaishree w/o Tanaji Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS fast21433.09 3 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21492 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Vishwanath Maruti Andgaonkar through LRs & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21448 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Chandrakant Bali Kamble & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.21442 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Vinayak Ramrao Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS fast21433.09 4 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21437 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Sanjay Appasaheb Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21465 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Vijay Prabhakar Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21245 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Pandit Vishwanath Andgaonkar & others .. RESPONDENTS fast21433.09 5 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21487 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Chandar Ramrao Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 21240 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer P.W.D., Z.P. Latur .. APPELLANT VERSUS Bibhishan Dattu Bhosale & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. Mr. V.D. Hon, advocate for the appellant. Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP for the State. ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 28 th JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : fast21433.09 6 1 These are the appeals presented by acquiring body raising exception to the judgment and award passed by Ad-hoc District Judge -2, Latur on LAR no. 200/1994 and other companion matters decided on 21-4-2009. 2 Agricultural lands belonging to the claimants came to be acquired for construction of Killari-Ashiv-Matola road. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be issued on 10-11-1988 and, after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, award came to be passed on 14-1-1991. The Special Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 155/- per R in respect of the acquired agricultural lands. Claimants, being dis-satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, tendered separate applications seeking reference of the matters to the civil court for determination of market value of the acquired lands. Claimants claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 4/- to Rs. 5/- per sq. ft. i.e. Rs. 1,50,000/- to Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre. After considering the evidence lead by the parties, reference court arrived at conclusion that the fair market price of the acquired lands would be Rs. 620/- per R. 3 With the assistance of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the fast21433.09 7 reference court and also scrutinised the relevant material made available by the learned counsel while arguing the appeal. Claimants, in order to substantiate their claim, placed reliance on evidence in the form of comparable sale instances. One Babru s/o Dadarao Bhosale, CW 1, has proved sale instance at exh. 13. Besides his evidence, sale instance at exh. 12 dated 1-1-1990 of land admeasuring 50 R which has been alienated for Rs. 20,000/- out of survey no. 5/1 situate at Motala is proved. Claimants’ witness has deposed as regards the quality and fertility of the land covered by the sale instance as well as the acquired lands. According to him, the acquired lands are within the proximate distance of the land covered by the sale instance. He has further deposed that the village locality is just 200 ft. away from the land sold and the lands acquired. The land covered by the sale instance is a dry crop land. CW 2 Limbraj examined at exh. 26 has proved the sale transaction at exh. 27. The sale instance is dated 3-10-1988 which is in respect of dry crop land situate at village Hasalgaon, bearing survey no. 156 admeasuring 7 acres out of which an area to the extent of 3 acres has been sold for consideration of Rs. 80,000/-. CW 3 Nandkumar Darphalkar is examined at exh. 63 who deposed about the quality and fertility of the lands and about the facility of irrigation through bore well or well water having been available to the acquired lands and the crops used fast21433.09 8 to be taken by the agriculturists. Apart from the evidence in the form of sale instances, copy of the award passed by the Civil Court in respect of acquisition of land for MSEB has been placed on record. An area out of survey no. 145 has been acquired and the court has determined market value of the land at Rs. 6/- per sq. ft. The land survey no. 145 also belongs to the same village i.e. village Matola. Considering the evidence placed on record, reference court by application of certain guess work arrived at conclusion that the market value the acquired land shall be Rs. 620/- per R. Infact, although the claimants placed reliance on the judgment delivered by the civil court in reference application, wherein rate of Rs.6/- per sq. ft. has been determined in respect of acquisition of land, the court did not consider said evidence and proceeded to award a meager amount of compensation. Although the claimants claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 5 /- to Rs. 6/- per sq ft., reference court awarded meager amount i.e. Rs. 620/- per R. Enhancement that has been directed by the reference court is quite moderate and based on evidence placed on record by the claimants. For the reasons recorded above, I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in these appeals. Appeals are devoid of substance hence stand rejected. fast21433.09 9 4 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE dyb