1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NOS. 125 OF 2006 AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 261 OF 2004 FIRST APPEAL NO. 125 OF 2006 1. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa KRCL, Amey Guest House, Davorlim Road, P. O. Navelim, Salcete-Goa. 2. The Chief Engineer, Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., Rawanfond, Margao, Goa. ... Appellants versus Shri Mohandas Bhicu Bhat R/o State Bank of India Housing Society, Near Old Survey Office, Borda, Margao Goa. ... Respondent Shri A. D. Bhobe, Advocate for the Appellants. Shri C. A. Coutinho, Advocate for the Respondent. FIRST APPEAL NO. 261 OF 2004 Mohandas Bhiku Bhat, State Bank of India Housing Society, Near Old Survey Office, Borda, Margao-Goa. ... Appellant 2 versus 1. The Chief Engineer, Konkan Railway Corporation, 4th Floor, Souza Towers, Church Square, Panaji-Goa-403 001. 2. Special Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa, K.R.C.L., Amay Guest House, Davorlim Road, P.O.Navelim, Salcete-Goa-403 707. ... Respondents Shri C. A. Coutinho, Advocate for the Appellant. CORAM : N. A. BRITTO, J. DATE : 14TH OCTOBER, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT These are cross appeals and are directed against the Judgment dated 22-7-2004 of the reference Court in L.A.C. No.232 of 1995 by which compensation payable has been enhanced from Rs.4/- to Rs.28/- per sq. meter. 2. Applicant's land admeasuring 3,300 sq. meters from survey No.77/12 of Loliem village was acquired by the Government vide 3 notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 gazetted on 27-6-1991, and by award dated 31-3-1994, the Land Acquisition Officer was pleased to award compensation at the rate of ` 4/- per sq. meter and ` 47,389.13 as the value of 112 trees existing in the said property. The cross appeal has been filed by the applicant taking objection for the deduction of the value of the trees. 3. In First Appeal No.42 of 2005 by Judgment dated 6-10-2010 in the case of Smt. Shrimati Vishwanath Acharya(since dec.) rep. by her L.Rs. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another in respect of survey Nos.180/1 and 172/1 of the same village, this Court was pleased to enhance the compensation payable from ` 4/- per sq. meter as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer to ` 21/- excluding the value of the trees paid separately. 4. Shri A. D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Special Land Acquisition Officer/K.R.C. submits that these appeals be disposed off in the light of the Judgment passed by this Court in First Appeal No.42 of 2005. 4 5. Shri C. A. Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that compensation payable in this case was assessed on the basis of a sale deed dated 4-7-1988 after taking a deduction of 60%, and, therefore there is no scope for reduction of the amount payable. Learned Counsel may be right. But, if the compensation payable has been determined in this case on the basis of the sale deed, the compensation payable in First Appeal No.42 of 2005 was also based on another sale deed dated 7-2-1990 by which a plot was sold at the rate of ` 64/- per sq. meter. 6. Similar lands situated in the same village acquired under the same notification need to be given same compensation, so as to avoid disparity in payment of compensation. 7. The Apex Court in several cases including the case of M/s. Printers House Pvt. Ltd. v. Mst. Saiyadan (deceased) by L.Rs and others(1994 SC 1160), has held that: “If 'Comparable Sales Method of Valuation of land' is adopted for determining the market-value of an acquired plot of land, it generally 5 holds good for determination of the market-value of several acquired plots of land if the acquisition of all such plots of land is made pursuant to the same preliminary Notification.” 8. The land covered in First Appeal No.42 of 2005 was of survey Nos.180/1 and 172/1 of Loliem village covered by the same notification as in this case, and, therefore on the basis of Judgment dated 6-10-2010 in First Appeal No.42 of 2005 in the case of Smt. Shrimati Vishwanath Acharya(since dec.) by her L.Rs. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another the applicant would be entitled for compensation at the rate of ` 21/- per sq. meter by excluding the value paid for the trees, under clause secondly of sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the said Act. 9. In the light of that, the award of the learned reference Court dated 22-7-2004 is hereby modified, and both the appeals are accordingly disposed of. Applicant would be entitled to the said compensation at the rate of ` 21/- per sq. meter for the acquired land with all statutory benefits. No order as to costs. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD 6