fast9930.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 9930 OF 2011 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS Nath s/o Tulshiram Bombde & another .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 9934 OF 2011 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS Jagannath s/o venkatti Wangwad & another .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.R. Salve, advocate for the appellants. Mr S.N. Kendre, AGP for the State ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 29 th August, 2011 PER COURT : 1 These are the appeals raising exception to the judgment and award passed by the Civil Judge, Sr.Dn., Latur on 9-9-2009 in LAR No. 577/1993 and 578/1993. fast9930.11 2 2 Agricultural lands belonging to the claimants comprising of area to the extent of 1 H and 78 R and 18 R respectively came to be acquired for construction of 33 K.V. Sub-Station of M.S.E.B. at village Bhatangali, Tq. & Dist. Latur. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 21-3-1989 and, after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, the Land Acquisition Officer passed award on 16-7-1992 and offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 34000/- per H i.e. Rs. 340/- per R. The claimants being dis-satisfied with the offer of compensation made by the Land Acquisition Officer, tendered separate applications seeking reference of the matter to the civil court for determination of market value of the acquired lands. Claimants contend that the market price of the acquired lands at the time of issuance of section 4 notification was more than Rs. 5/- per sq. ft. Thus, the claimants claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 55,000/- per acre or at the rate of Rs. 5/- per sq. ft. 3 In order to substantiate their contentions, claimants placed reliance on oral as well as documentary evidence. Claimants examined themselves and stated about the situation as well as quality and fertility of the acquired lands as well as the land covered under the sale instance exh. 35. fast9930.11 3 According to the claimants, acquired lands situate at Latur- Nanded State High Way and is adjacent to the locality. They further contend that the acquired lands have non-agricultural potentiality and as such they could have secured substantial amount on alienation of the property for non- agricultural use. Sale instance at exh. 35 pertains to 13 R land which has been sold for consideration of Rs. 10,000/- on 30-9-1985. Sale instance is four years prior to issuance of section 4 notification. As such, reference court considered rise in price of the property at 10% per annum and computed compensation with 40% increase and reached conclusion that the market value of the acquired lands on the date of issuance of section 4 notification would be Rs. 1,076/- per R. Reference court considering the situation of the land and other relevant factors, was pleased to direct the State Government to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre i.e. Rs. 1,000/- per R. 4 I have perused the judgment and award passed by the reference court and heard arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant while arguing the matter has referred the relevant record and copies of the documents which were made available for perusal of the court. Considering the contentions and fast9930.11 4 on considering the reasons recorded by the reference court, I am of the view that the conclusion reached by the reference court is quite reasonable and proper. The amount of compensation that has been awarded is quite marginal and the enhancement in the amount of compensation directed by the reference court is based on appreciation of evidence placed on record by the claimants. For the reasons stated above, I do not find that the appeals deserve any favourable consideration. Both the appeals are devoid of substance hence stand dismissed. 5 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb