Dismissed

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept. Zp, Ahmednagar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Dec 2013FA/3071/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the first appeal by the acquiring body challenging the Reference Court's compensation award under the Land Acquisition Act. The Court held that the awarded amount was reasonable, considering relevant sale instances and the Supreme Court directive to consider the highest rate.

What did the court decide?

First Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept. Zp… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

 APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

FIRST APPEAL NO.3071 OF 2013

¶6

Office Notes, Office
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's
orders or directions
andRegistrar's
orders.

¶7

Court's or Judge's orders

¶8

Mr.Shivaji T.Shelke, advocate for the appellant.
Mr.M.R.Sonwane, advocate for Respondent Nos.2,5 and 6.
Mrs.S.A.Dhumal, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State.

¶9

 CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.

¶10

 Date : 18.12.2013.

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

Heard.

¶13

The appellant is the acquiring body assails the award passed by the Reference Court U/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

¶14

Mr.Shelke, learned counsel for the appellant strenuously contends that the Reference Court has awarded exorbitant compensation amount. The SLAO has considered all the relevant aspects of the matter and awarded just and reasonable amount of compensation. According to the learned counsel, the sale deeds relied are not comparable sale instances. They are not in respect of similarly situated lands. The Court without any basis has enhanced the compensation amount. According to the learned counsel, merely on assumption the amount can not be enhanced.

¶15

¶16

Mr.Sonwane, learned counsel supports the judgment.

¶17

The Reference Court has considered the sale instances which were before the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The sale instances showed the prevailing market rate at the time of acquisition from Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) to Rs.40,000/(Rupees forty thousand) per hectare. The Court has awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) per hectare. The Apex Court in a case of "Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (Regd.) Faridkot and others Vs. State of Punjab and others." reported in AIR 2012 Supreme Court 2721 , has held that the highest sale instance is required to be considered for computing the compensation amount in respect of acquired land. The Court has not relied upon the sale instance which is at a distance of four and half kilometers from the acquired and has also not considered the highest sale instance which was produced before the SLAO. The Court has awarded reasonable amount of compensation.

¶18

In light of the above, the First Appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

(S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)

¶20

Dt.18.12.2013. asp/office/fa3071.13

¶21

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept. Zp, Ahmednagar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept. Zp, Ahmednagar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Dhondiba Eknath Kajale

Savita Balkrushna @ Anil Kulkarni and Ors. Vs Waman Sopan Shitre and Anr.

Suresh Babulal Gavande Vs the Chief Officer, Nandurbar Nagar Parishad and Anr.

Ramesh Bhaskar Patil Vs Sumanbai Chandanmal Rathi

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sudha Kailash Chavhan and Ors.

M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sharda Chandrakant Bidave and Ors.