Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon respondent passed award dated 31.3.1999 and fixed market value of the acquired land by dividing the same into three groups.
Gat Nos.
As regards the trees, the High Court discarded the report of the valuer on the premise that the same had been submitted after the award was passed by the respondent.
While dealing with the appeals filed by the respondent, the High Court referred to the award passed by the respondent, the evidence produced by the parties and held that the Reference Court companymitted a serious error by recording a finding that the acquired land included Bagayat land.
Shri Sanjay Kharde, learned companynsel appearing for the respondent supported the impugned judgment and argued that the High Court rightly reduced the companypensation determined by the Reference Court by taking into companysideration average of various sale instances produced on behalf of the acquiring authority and in exercise of power under Article 136 of the Constitution, this Court may number interfere with the finding of fact recorded by the High Court that the entire acquired land was Jirayat and numberportion thereof was Bagayat.
The declaration under Section 6 was issued sometime in April 1997.
For Group II and Group I lands he fixed market value at the rate of Rs.58,000/ and Rs.54,000/ per hectare respectively.
We have companysidered the respective arguments and carefully perused the record.
36 to 41 respectively.
However, the fact of the matter is that numbersuch question was put to the witness.
The reports placed on record at Exh.
1,35,030.00 21 x 6430 07 Tambrine Rs.
On a reference made by the Collector, the Reference Court examined the pleadings of the parties and framed the following issues What is the market price of the land on the date of numberification u Sec.
1,06,897.00 7 x 6430 03 Mango Rs.
77,007.00 3 x 35669 05 57 08 Jujubee Rs.
In the cross examination, the witness stood by reports Exhibits 36 to 41 given by him.R 27 was also sold before the numberification but after the land companyprised in Ext.
For land falling in Group I, i.e. Jirayat land, the respondent fixed market value at Rs.68,000/ per hectare.
Does the petitioner prove that the market price of land determined by the L.A.O. is inadequate?
52,920.00 8 x 6615 06 Custard Apple Rs.
The land companyered by Ext.
It was open to the companynsel for the respondent to cross examine the witness and elicit the special reasons, if any, for sale of land allegedly at a higher price.
36,258.00 6 x 6615 02 Mango Rs.
Serial.
Exhibit 28 was proved by Shri Arjun Sukdeo Patil, who had appeared as witness on behalf of the appellants.
4 of L.A. Act?
Does the petitioner prove that he accepted the amount of companypensation under protest?
01 87/B 7 Jujubee Rs.
76,560.00 10 x 7656 01 Lime Rs.
The appellants accepted the companypensation under protest and then filed applications under Section 18 of the Act for determination of the companypensation by the Court.
of valuation made by claimants Valuer.
97/1 was sold at the rate of Rs.2,76,041/ per hectare, 7/12 extracts marked as Exhibits 13 to 27 and fixed market value of Jirayat land at the rate of Rs.3 lacs per hectare.
Is the petitioner entitled to enhance companypensation?
The Reference Court also held that for pot kharab, the land owners are entitled to 50 of the companypensation determined for Jirayat land.
35,375.00 5x7075 03 9/2 10 Jujubee Rs.
The Reference Court then adverted to the testimony of Shri Ravindra Ghanshyam Chaudhari, Agriculture and Horticulture Consultant and accepted the valuation made by him in respect of the trees standing on different portions of the acquired land.
53,620.00 7 x 7660 02 42/A/2 5 Jujubee Rs.
The Reference Court then companysidered the evidence produced by the parties including sale deed Exhibit 28 by which 92 ares Jirayat land companyprised in Gat No.
For pot kharab land, market value was fixed at Rs.15,00/ per hectare.
13,469.00 04 151/1 21 Jujubee Rs.
Types of Trees Valuation of trees 80 Nos.
What order?
The Reference Court also referred to the statement of Arjun Sukdeo Patil who deposed that there were wells in the acquired land and fixed market value of such land at the rate of Rs.6 lacs per hectare by treating the same as Bagayat land.
By numberification dated 14.3.1996 issued under Section 4 1 of the Act, the Government of Maharashtra initiated the proceedings for the acquisition of various parcels of land including those belonging to the appellants situated in villages Deoli Bhoras and Bilakhed, Taluka Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon for Minor Irrigation Tank, Deoli Bhoras.
S. Singhvi, J. These appeals are directed against judgment dated 9.11.2006 of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court whereby the appeals preferred by the respondent under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short, the Act were allowed and the amount of companypensation determined by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalagaon, hereinafter described as, the Reference Court was substantially reduced.
