Notification under Section 4 1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short, the Act , acquiring an extent of 20 acres of land in Survey No.24/2 situated in Akola town for companystruction of the houses to weaker sections and middle income group people, was published in the State Gazette on August 11, 1965.
The Land Acquisition Officer in his award dated March 26, 1971 determined the market value of the front portion of land admeasuring 4 acres 18 gunthas at Rs.5,500/ per acre and for the rest of 15 acres and 32 gunthas at 4,500/ per acres.
Shri Mohta, learned senior companynsel for the appellant, companytended that the High Court totally omitted to companysider Exh.38, a sale deed dated May 14, 1964, in respect of lands of an extent of 5392 sq.
Dissatisfied therewith, the appellant sought reference under Section 18 of the Act and the Senior Civil Judge in his award and decree dated September 26, 1972 enhanced the companypensation in respect of the lands in the front portion at Rs.1.25 per sq.
On appeal by the State and also on cross appeal by the appellant, by judgment and decree dated July 28, 1980 the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court set aside the award and decree of the Reference Court and companyfirmed that of the Land Acquisition Officer.
for a companysideration of Rs.4,000/ as broken by PW 6, the son of the vendee and Ex.44 dated February 8, 1964 of an extent of 6950 sq.
It is true, as numbered by the Reference Court and also accepted by the High Court, that the lands are situated in a developing area surrounded by roads on three sides and the lands had potential value for development for building purposes.
He also deducted Rs.3,000/ per acre towards development charges and 30 land was left over for roads etc.
Thus this appeal by special leave.
and to the rest of the land at Rs.1/ per sq.
for companysideration of Rs.5,000/ as spoken by PW 8, the clerk of the Yendee who was formerly an advocate and also was an ex M.P. These two documents having been executed 18 months preceding the date of the acquisition and the Reference Court having accepted them to be reflective of having had the same potentialities, since the lands are situated adjacent to the acquired land, they would establish companyparable value.
