Chandrashekhar Mahdukar Kadukar v. State Of Maharashtra Through The Collector, Amravati And 2 Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.1110/2015 APPELLANTS :
1. Chandrashekhar Madhukar Kadukar, (Original Aged 35 years, Petitioners) Occ. Agriculturist.
On R.A.
2. Anant Madhukar Kadukar, Both R/o Ghuikhed, Tq. Chandur Railway, Dist. Amravati.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS : 1) State of Maharashtra, (Original through the Collector, Amravati. Respondents) On R.A.
2) Special Land Acquisition Officer, Upper Wardha Project No.4, Amravati.
3) Executive Engineer, Bembla Project Division, Yavatmal, Dist. Yavatmal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.P. Kalmegh, Advocate for appellants Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2 Shri M.A. Kadu, Advocate for respondent no.3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 29/11/2022 ORAL JUDGMENT
1.
Heard Shri A.P. Kalmegh, learned counsel for the appellants, Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 2 and Shri M.A. Kadu, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.
2.
The factual position in the present first appeal is as under - Bembla River Project, District Yavatmal Date of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.
26/10/2005 Property details Area of property LAO Award Dated Ref. Court Award Dated 06/09/2008 24/04/2015 Plot No: 642/2 Village:
Ghuikhed Tahsil Chandur Railway District :
Amravati Plot Area : 66 Sq.mtr.
Rs.140/- per Sq.mtr.
Rs.500 per Sq.mtr.
Construction: 66 Sq.mtr.
Rs.4569/- per Sq.
mtr.
Rs.6168.50 per Sq. mtr.
3.
The appeal challenges the judgment of the Reference Court dated 24/04/2015, whereby the learned Reference Court has enhanced the compensation for the open plot to Rs.500/-per sq.mtr. and has granted compensation for the constructed area at the rate of
Rs.6168.50/- per sq.mtr., in respect of plot No.624/2, as detailed above.
4.
In First Appeal No.1378/2018 (Sharad Gangadhar Gulhane Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Camp, Amravati and others) and First Appeal No.389/2018 (Lilabai Omkarrao Giri and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Camp, Amravati and others) decided on 06/09/2021, this Court, while considering the claim for enhancement of compensation in respect of plots at village Ghuikhed had decided the compensation to Rs.575/- per sq.mtr. The fixing of the said rate of open plot, was based upon the fact that the said village is located on the border of the State Highway i.e. Aurangabad - Nagpur Highway, about half kilometer from the highway there is an approach road to the village and considering the sale deed dated 30/03/1995 of the same village, the compensation was enhanced considering the escalation/increase per year for a period of 101⁄2 years and the aforesaid rate of Rs.575/- per sq.mtr. for open plot has been fixed.
5.
In the instant matter, no material, has been brought to my notice existing on record, for me to take a different view than what has been already taken by this court in First Appeal No.1378/2018 (Sharad Gangadhar Gulhane Vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Camp, Amravati and others). 6.
The evidence of Shri Chandrashekhar Wankhede at Exh.36 the valuer, who claims the market rate to be Rs.2000/- per sq.mtr. for open plot, a perusal whereof would demonstrate that he has not enquired about any sale instance, from the same village, or from the neighbouring village, in order to arrive at the rate as being quoted in his report, except for the sale-deed of Shri Sawwalakhe, which is admittedly, as per Shri Kalmegh, learned counsel for the claimants, not placed on record, which is also depicted from the fact that in the evidence of PW 2 - Chandrashekhar the same has not been exhibited at all. That apart, though the valuation report at Exh.37 makes a mention of the sale-deed of Shri Sawwalakhe from village Ghuikhed, in his cross-examination (pg.86 of the paper-book) he claims ignorance regarding any details of the transaction of Shri Sawwalakhe. He further, admits in his cross-examination that
for the purpose of determining the value of the plot, the value of the neighbouring properties, has to be ascertained which has not been done by him. Neither he has enquired from the Gram Pachayat, when the construction was made, apart from which, there is nothing in his report or on record to indicate the nature of the construction, considering which, though the rate of construction, granted by the Land Acquisition Officer, as well as the Reference Court is much on the higher side, however, since there is no appeal by the acquiring body in respect of the same, it cannot be interfered with. 7.
That being the position, in view of the rate of open plot in village Ghuikhed, having already been determined by this Court at Rs.575/- per sq.mtr. the appellants, would only be entitled to that benefit and nothing else. Though the rate for construction awarded by the learned Reference Court, is considerably higher, however, since there is no appeal or cross-objection by the acquiring body, the same cannot be gone into in this appeal which is by the claimants. 8.
In the result, the first appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment under reference is modified by enhancing the
rate of open land as granted by the learned Reference Court at Rs.500/- per sq.mtr. to Rs.575/- per sq.mtr, as held in Sharad Gangadhar Gulhane (supra). Rest of the judgment of the learned Reference Court is maintained.
9.
The difference in the amount of compensation, and all ancillary benefits arising therefrom as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, as applicable thereto be calculated and deposited in the Reference Court within a period of eight weeks from today. The difference in court fee be deposited in this Court. All pending civil applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. No order as to costs. (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) Wadkar SUKHADEORAO WADKAR