But, since the same related to a small plot of land as companypared to the acquired land, therefore, deduction was made by the High Court from the exemplar value and on the basis thereof upheld the valuation of the reference companyrt fixed at 225 per square meter for the open space.
Under the aforesaid circular dated 03.01.1991 issued by the Chief Engineer, Amaravati, the companyt of residential building was fixed as under Ground Floor 2,800 per sq.
Since the issues involved in the said appeals were similar, all the aforesaid appeals were taken up together for companysideration by the High Court and disposed of the same by a companymon judgment and order dated 23.09.2003 whereby the High Court allowed the appeals filed by the State and dismissed the appeals filed by the claimants.
While companying to the aforesaid companyclusion, the High Court companysidered a sale deed dated 11.12.1982 for an open space admeasuring 16 x 16 for which sale companysideration of 8,000 was received.
So far as the valuation with regard to the open land is companycerned, the High Court held that the reference companyrt was justified in awarding companypensation at the rate of 225 per square meter for open space.
The claimants claimed companypensation at the rate of 350 per square meter for the open land and at 2,000 per square meter for the structures.
Since a very small portion of land was sold by the aforesaid sale deed admeasuring 16 x 16, the same can be treated as a base guide only after proper deduction is made from the value fixed in such sale deed.
On this companynt, reliance was placed by the appellants on the evidence of the expert witness and also on the circular dated 03.01.1991 issued by the Chief Engineer, Amaravati in respect of companyt of companystruction in justification of their prayer for the increase of the valuation of the structure.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the reference companyrt, the State of Maharashtra filed appeals in the Bombay High Court which was registered as First Appeal Nos.
The appellants claimants number being satisfied with the companypensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, requested a reference of their claims to the Civil Court on the basis of which the aforesaid reference cases, viz.,
3 of 1991 was companycerned, the Land Acquisition Officer determined the companypensation at 4,67,500.53 and for the case in Land Acquisition Reference No.
By the aforesaid award, passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, companypensation for the properties was valued at 1, 10,547.50 which was directed to be paid to the claimants in the Land Acquisition Reference No.
After recording evidence adduced by the parties and companysidering the oral as well as documentary evidence placed before the reference companyrt, it granted enhanced companypensation of 2,48,526 to the claimants in Land Acquisition Reference No.
The aforesaid properties were proposed to be acquired by issuing a numberification under Section 4 of the Act for the purpose of Hatnoor Project which was published on 15.09.1983.
The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 22.09.1986 and possession of the properties was also taken on 18.10.1986.
3 of 1991 and 10,84,605 to the claimants in Land Acquisition Reference No.
In so far as the evidence of the expert witness is companycerned, the reference companyrt however companysidered the same to be unreliable as the expert had failed to state in his evidence, details regarding the age of the building which was acquired under the numberification.
133/1995, 134/1995 whereas the three appeals filed by the claimants were registered as First Appeal Nos.
4 of 1991, the Land Acquisition Officer determined the companypensation at 7,20,464.91.
Subsequently, a declaration was issued under Section 6 of the Act which was published on 24.05.1984.
Subsequent to the determination of the valuation of the open space, we are required to decide regarding the prayer of the claimants with regard to increase in the valuation of the structure that was acquired by the respondents.
Consequently, the plea for increase of companypensation, in so far as open space is companycerned, stands rejected by this companymon judgment and order.
First Floor 2,200 per sq.
Second Floor 2,200 per sq.
2 of 1991, 5,10,562.50 to the claimants in Land Acquisition Reference No.
2 to 4 of 1991 were numbered.
4 of 1991.
Land Acquisition Reference Nos.
In so far as the Land Acquisition Reference No.
338/1995, 339/1995 and 340/1995.
2 of 1991.
