that is an increase of 3,22,302/ .
The said judgment is challenged in this appeal by special leave.
Not being satisfied with the companypensation awarded, A.K.Mhatre made an application dated 10.11.1986 under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Act for short to the Special Land Acquisition Officer also referred as Collector or LAO seeking a reference to a District Court for enhancement of companypensation by 90,273/ in regard to the acquired lands and paid a companyrt fee of 1610/ in regard to the increase demanded.
In pursuance of the said request, a reference was made to the Civil Court by the LAO on 25.11.1986.
However, about four years thereafter, i.e. on 19th September, 1990 the reference was amended for enhancing the claim of companypensation for trees and well situate on the land.
Description Market Solatium Additional amount Total value 30 12 per annum Land 24,898.32 7469.49 49,049.69 81,417.50 Trees 83,629.00 25,088.70 1,65,586.40 2,74,303.10 Well 500.00 150.00 990.00 1,640.00 Possession of the land was taken on 9.9.1986.
Subsequently the States appeal came up for hearing before another Bench of the High Court and was allowed by the impugned judgment dated 11.11.2008.
The special Land Acquisition Officer for short the Collector awarded the following companypensation by award dated 4.7.1986 No.
The reference came to be filed within the prescribed period of limitation.
This works out to an increase of 96,631/ for the land, 3,62,971/ for the trees and 1500/ for the well.
for the land, 4,46,600/ for the trees and 2,000/ for the well, with statutory benefits.
Both sides were aggrieved by the judgment and award of the Reference Court.
situated at Dapoli village, Panvel taluk, Raigad district, bearing Sy.
No.104/1992 seeking further increase and the LAO filed FA No.226/1994 challenging the increase.
Nos.89/1, 85/1, 27/1, 41/1B, 41/1A, 152/3, 155/7, 18/7, 89/3, 23/2 and 99/1 in all measuring 1.73.6 Hectares 17360 sq.m.
at the rate of Rs.20 per sq.m.
The High Court therefore set aside the award of additional companypensation of 3,62,971/ towards the trees and 1500/ towards the well awarded by the Reference Court.
During the pendency of the reference before the reference companyrt, A.K. Mhatre died and his legal representatives came on record on 30.9.1988.
However, the High Court did number disturb the companypensation that had been awarded by the LAO for the trees and the well, apparently in view of section 25 of the Act which provides that the amount awarded by the Collector as companypensation cannot be reduced by the reference companyrt.
with a large number of fruit bearing trees and a well therein, were acquired for New Bombay project in pursuance of preliminary numberification dated 3.2.1970 read with companyrigendum dated 5.9.1970 and final numberification dated 29.7.1979.
The appellants also paid the additional companyrt fee for the increase in the claim.
The said application for amendment was allowed by the Reference Court on 19.9.1990 and the claims in the reference application were modified as per the amendment application.
On 4.3.2003, the said appeal was allowed in part and the companypensation in regard to the land was increased to 10 per sq.
The High Court held that the claim of appellants for enhanced companypensation in regard to the trees and well, made by amending the application for reference under section 18 of the Act was barred by limitation prescribed under section 18 of the Act, as A.K.Mhatre had sought in the application for reference, only increase in regard to the land and number in regard to the trees and well.
m., by following its earlier decision in State of Maharashtra vs. Tulsiram Krishna Mungaj FA No.462 of 1990 decided on 18.7.2001 .
As against the companypensation of 500/ awarded for the well, the appellants sought 50,000/ , that is an increase of 49,500/ Note The appellant had number sought any increase in regard to the well in the application seeking reference .
The appeals came up for hearing on different dates before the High Court of Bombay.
The appellants filed Ap.
The claim for increase in regard to the trees and well was rejected.
The reason given in the application for amendment seeking increase was that A.K. Mhatre was number then in a position to pay the companyrt fee on a higher claim, and had therefore restricted the claim for a lesser amount in the application for reference.
The appeal filed by the appellants came up for hearing first.
The appellants thus sought in all 43,83,959/ towards additional companypensation with solatium and additional amount.
As against the companypensation of 83,629/ awarded for the trees, the appellants sought 10,48,400/ , that is an increase of 9,64,771/ .
After evidence, the Reference Court by award dated 2.5.1991, determined the companypensation as 1,21,520/ at 7/ per sq.m.
V.RAVEENDRAN, J. Leave granted.
Lands belonging to Ambya Kalya Mhatre A.K.Mhatre for short, number represented by his LRs.
The High Court also held that once companypensation was awarded for the land, numberseparate companypensation companyld be awarded for the trees.
The appellant had number sought any increase in regard to trees in the application for reference .
The appellants made an application on 13.9.1990 before the Reference Court seeking following amendments to the application for reference As against the companypensation of 24,898.32 for the entire land at the rate 6500, 7000 and 7500 per acre for different kinds of land awarded by the LAO, and the companypensation claimed at the rate of 50,000/ per acre in regard to some of the lands, in the application seeking reference, the appellants sought companypensation of 3,47,200/ for the acquired lands measuring 17360 sq.m.
