The State of Maharashtra challenged an order enhancing compensation to Rs. 10 per sq. meter. The High Court, relying on a prior identical judgment regarding adjacent villages, held the enhanced rate just and fair, dismissing the appeal.
The appeal was dismissed as the enhanced compensation was held to be just and fair.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Lsp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 357 OF 1993
The State of Maharashtra..Appellant
versus
Shri Shankar S. Patil..Respondents
Mr. Y.M. Nakhawa, AGP for the Appellant - State.
Mr. K. N. Kore for the Respondents.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
DATED : 10th October, 2007
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1.This appeal is filed by the State of
Maharashtra and challenged the judgment dated 21-3-1992
passed by the Extra Joint District Judge, Thane in Land
Acquisition No. 137 of 1988 enchancing the
compensation, after considering the material on record,
at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter. Therefore, being
aggrieved by the same, this appeal is preferred by the
State of Maharashtra against the order of enhanced
compensation.
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
parties. Both the parties fairly pointed out the
judgment passed by this Court in identically placed and
situated land acquisition references arising out of the
same dispute and of adjacent villages, whereby the
judgement dated 26th October, 2005 passed by Shri D. G.
2
Deshpande, J. in First Appeal No. 813 of 1993 and
others, it has been observed as under:
"So far as all the appeals are concerned, they are
arising out of land acquisition proceedings from Village
Kopar Khairane. The reference Court awarded
compensation at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Mtrs. in
all these cases for the acquired lands, many matters
from village Kopar Khairane were decided by this Court
and Rs.10/- per Sq. Mtr. is the proper rate of
compensation, even the case of enhancement is made out.
Therefore, there is no substance in all these appeals.
Hence all the appeals are dismissed. No order as to
costs in all the appeals."
3.The learned counsel appearing for the
respondent pointed out and it is not disputed by the
learned Advocate for the appellant that the Village
Talvadi which is in Taluka and District Thane is
adjacent to the villages Kopar Khairane and Ghansoli
which is in Taluka and District Thane. Taking note of
all these factors as there is no reason now to disturb
the findings arrived at by the learned Judge. In view
of this, as a whole, enhanced compensation as awarded is
just and fair and with view of the above compensation,
this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
3
[ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.]
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. meter is just and fair given identical findings in adjacent villages.
Whether the matter requires remand or reconsideration despite a prior identical judgment confirming the same compensation rate.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
D. G. Deshpande, J.Followed¶14
First Appeal No. 813 of 1993 and others
The State of Maharashtra
Shri Shankar S. Patil
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court