Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act lays down factors which are to be taken into consideration while awarding compensation. The proximity of the land near Highway assumes importance in deciding the market value of the land. Further, the awards which are passed in respect of adjoining lands also have to be taken into consideration.
1. The appellant original claimant has filed this appeal, challenging the judgment and order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alibag, District Raigad in Land Acquisition Reference No. 65 of 1982.
2. Brief facts are as under:
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Metro Centre No. 1, Panvel, District Raigad, acquired Survey No. 92 admeasuring 53 acres and 1 guntha which is equivalent to 5310 sq. meters for the New Bombay Project. The land was acquired for the benefit of CIDCO. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 3rd/4th February, 1970. The award was passed on 14/08/1981. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ Rs. 3/- per sq. meter as against the claim @ Rs. 25 per sq. meter made by the appellant herein in his reply to the notice under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act. The possession of the land was taken by SLAO on 14/08/1981.
4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred a reference under Section 18 of the said Act before the C.J.S.D., Raigad in Land Reference No. 65 of 1982. In the said matter, claimant stood awarded compensation @ Rs. 10/- per sq. meter. The claimant examined his son Anant Sitaram Khutarkar and also examined Mr. Manohar Vaidya who was an expert valuer. The appellant also produced number of sale deeds in support of his case in respect of adjoining lands which were sold at the relevant period as also the awards passed by SLAO in respect of the adjacent lands.
5. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the land in question is situated at a distance of about 1000 meters from the Mumbai-Pune National Highway, Panvel ST Bus Stand is situated at a distance of 1600 meters, Panvel Railway Station is at about 1700 meters, the Panvel Co-operative Industrial Estate is at a distance of 900 meters, Jawahar Industrial Estate is at a distance of 1850 meters, Jenson & Nicholson Co. is at a distance of 800 meters, Panvel-Sion Highway is at a distance of 1600 meters and distance from Diva-Panvel railway track is about 150 meters. He also submitted that water and electricity was available to the land in question. The N.A. potential was very high. The land was already leveled and, therefore, there was no question of incurring any development cost. The land had an easy access of transport, both, in respect of road and railway transport. He relied upon number of judgments of this Court wherein lands in question in the said cases were situated in Panvel Taluka and they were acquired at the same time. He relied upon the Division Bench Judgment of this Court comprising of Shah and Kotwal JJ in First Appeal No. 382 of 1981 decided along with the other companion appeals in March 1987. He also relied upon Division Bench Judgment of this Court (Coram : A.P. Shah & J.A. Patil, JJ.) dated 16/03/2000 delivered in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 alongwith other companion matters. He also relied upon number of other judgments. He submitted that considering the proximity of the land from the National Highway, the appellant was entitled to get compensation @ Rs. 25.12 per sq. meter. He also submitted that the claimant was entitled to claim 30% solatium under Section 23 Sub-clause (2) and is also entitled to get benefit under Section 23(1) A and accordingly the interest should also have been awarded @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% per annum for the further period till the date of actual payment.
6. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Government, on the other hand, submitted that the learned Single Judge of this Court (Coram : S.R. Sathe, J) delivered a judgment dated 10/08/2007 in First Appeal No. 777 of 1989 in which the learned Single Judge had observed that if the land was beyond 1000 meters then the rate which was awarded in such cases was @ Rs. 22/- per sq. meter.
7. There is no dispute in respect of the date of acquisition of the land and the location of the land. The only dispute which is raised by the claimant and which is opposed by the respondent is in respect of compensation which has to be awarded to the claimant. There is no dispute that the claimant is entitled to 30% solatium under Section 23 Sub-clause (2) and interest @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% per annum for the further period till the date of actual payment. The learned Counsel for the appellant also fairly and candidly admitted that since the award was published on 14/08/1981 i.e. prior to 30/04/1982, the appellant was not entitled to claim additional compensation as per Section 23(1)(a). The question, therefore, which falls for consideration before this Court is regarding compensation which is payable to the appellant. This area of land in Panvel City was acquired for the purpose of setting up a satellite city which is known as New Bombay and this land was acquired for the benefit of CIDCO. This Court, in similar cases, had an occasion to consider the compensation which was liable to be paid to the claimant in all these areas. The first judgment in respect of the lands in adjoining area of Panvel was of the Division Bench of this Court comprising of Shah and Kotwal JJ in First Appeal No. 382 of 1981 decided along with the other companion appeals in March 1987, followed by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court (Coram : A.P. Shah & J.A. Patil, JJ.) dated 16/03/2000 delivered in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 and other companion appeals and also one another judgment delivered by Division Bench of this Court (Coram : G.D. Patil & V.M. Kanade, JJ) dated 16/10/2001 in First Appeal No. 112 of 1988 alongwith other companion appeals.
8. In the present case, the claimant has examined the expert valuer Mr. Vaidya who has stated that the lands in question were already leveled and, therefore, 20% development charges which were ordered to be deducted from the market value was excessive. In my view, the said submission will have to be accepted. It is an admitted position that the land in question was leveled and, therefore, at the highest, 10% development charges could have been deducted from the market value while making calculations regarding payments to be made to the landlord. Similar view has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court in respect of the lands which are situated at the adjoining area. It is an admitted position that all the lands acquired from different villages are almost adjacent to each other and are situated near Bombay-Pune National Highway.
9. Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act lays down factors which are to be taken into consideration while awarding compensation. The proximity of the land near Highway assumes importance in deciding the market value of the land. Further, the awards which are passed in respect of adjoining lands also have to be taken into consideration. After having perused the judgments on which the reliance has been placed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant, it can be seen that in respect of the lands which are situated at the distance of about 3 to 4 kilometers from the Highway, compensation @ Rs. 18/- per sq. meter has been granted, whereas in respect of the lands which are situated between 100 meters to 1500 meters, the compensation has been awarded at the rate between Rs. 22/- to Rs. 25/- per sq. meter. In the present case, it is no doubt true that the land was situated at a distance of about 1000 meters and in some cases, in such circumstances, the compensation @ Rs. 22/- has been awarded. The judgment on which reliance is placed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, compensation @ Rs. 15/- per sq. meter has been granted. However, in my view, ratio of the said judgment will not apply to the facts of the present case since the said rate was awarded considering the facts situation in the said case.
10. In the present case, considering the proximity of the land from the Highway as also from the ST Bus Stand, Railway Station and that it was situated near the extended Panvel Municipal Limits, in my view, the appellant is entitled to get compensation @ Rs. 25/- per sq. meter excluding 10% development charges. At the same time, since the award was passed on 14/08/1981, the appellant would be entitled to get 30% solatium under Section 23 Sub-clause (2) and also interest under Section 23(1) A @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% per annum for the further period till the actual date of payment.
11. The First Appeal is accordingly allowed. Judgment and Order passed by the Reference Court is accordingly modified. The First Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
Print Page
Bombay High Court
Sitaram Gosavi Khurarkar (Since ... vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 21 September, 2007
Equivalent citations: 2008 (1) BomCR 304, 2008 (2) MhLj 760
Bench: V Kanade
1. The appellant original claimant has filed this appeal, challenging the judgment and order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alibag, District Raigad in Land Acquisition Reference No. 65 of 1982.
2. Brief facts are as under:
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Metro Centre No. 1, Panvel, District Raigad, acquired Survey No. 92 admeasuring 53 acres and 1 guntha which is equivalent to 5310 sq. meters for the New Bombay Project. The land was acquired for the benefit of CIDCO. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 3rd/4th February, 1970. The award was passed on 14/08/1981. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ Rs. 3/- per sq. meter as against the claim @ Rs. 25 per sq. meter made by the appellant herein in his reply to the notice under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act. The possession of the land was taken by SLAO on 14/08/1981.
4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred a reference under Section 18 of the said Act before the C.J.S.D., Raigad in Land Reference No. 65 of 1982. In the said matter, claimant stood awarded compensation @ Rs. 10/- per sq. meter. The claimant examined his son Anant Sitaram Khutarkar and also examined Mr. Manohar Vaidya who was an expert valuer. The appellant also produced number of sale deeds in support of his case in respect of adjoining lands which were sold at the relevant period as also the awards passed by SLAO in respect of the adjacent lands.
5. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the land in question is situated at a distance of about 1000 meters from the Mumbai-Pune National Highway, Panvel ST Bus Stand is situated at a distance of 1600 meters, Panvel Railway Station is at about 1700 meters, the Panvel Co-operative Industrial Estate is at a distance of 900 meters, Jawahar Industrial Estate is at a distance of 1850 meters, Jenson & Nicholson Co. is at a distance of 800 meters, Panvel-Sion Highway is at a distance of 1600 meters and distance from Diva-Panvel railway track is about 150 meters. He also submitted that water and electricity was available to the land in question. The N.A. potential was very high. The land was already leveled and, therefore, there was no question of incurring any development cost. The land had an easy access of transport, both, in respect of road and railway transport. He relied upon number of judgments of this Court wherein lands in question in the said cases were situated in Panvel Taluka and they were acquired at the same time. He relied upon the Division Bench Judgment of this Court comprising of Shah and Kotwal JJ in First Appeal No. 382 of 1981 decided along with the other companion appeals in March 1987. He also relied upon Division Bench Judgment of this Court (Coram : A.P. Shah & J.A. Patil, JJ.) dated 16/03/2000 delivered in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 alongwith other companion matters. He also relied upon number of other judgments. He submitted that considering the proximity of the land from the National Highway, the appellant was entitled to get compensation @ Rs. 25.12 per sq. meter. He also submitted that the claimant was entitled to claim 30% solatium under Section 23 Sub-clause (2) and is also entitled to get benefit under Section 23(1) A and accordingly the interest should also have been awarded @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% per annum for the further period till the date of actual payment.
6. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Government, on the other hand, submitted that the learned Single Judge of this Court (Coram : S.R. Sathe, J) delivered a judgment dated 10/08/2007 in First Appeal No. 777 of 1989 in which the learned Single Judge had observed that if the land was beyond 1000 meters then the rate which was awarded in such cases was @ Rs. 22/- per sq. meter.
7. There is no dispute in respect of the date of acquisition of the land and the location of the land. The only dispute which is raised by the claimant and which is opposed by the respondent is in respect of compensation which has to be awarded to the claimant. There is no dispute that the claimant is entitled to 30% solatium under Section 23 Sub-clause (2) and interest @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% per annum for the further period till the date of actual payment. The learned Counsel for the appellant also fairly and candidly admitted that since the award was published on 14/08/1981 i.e. prior to 30/04/1982, the appellant was not entitled to claim additional compensation as per Section 23(1)(a). The question, therefore, which falls for consideration before this Court is regarding compensation which is payable to the appellant. This area of land in Panvel City was acquired for the purpose of setting up a satellite city which is known as New Bombay and this land was acquired for the benefit of CIDCO. This Court, in similar cases, had an occasion to consider the compensation which was liable to be paid to the claimant in all these areas. The first judgment in respect of the lands in adjoining area of Panvel was of the Division Bench of this Court comprising of Shah and Kotwal JJ in First Appeal No. 382 of 1981 decided along with the other companion appeals in March 1987, followed by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court (Coram : A.P. Shah & J.A. Patil, JJ.) dated 16/03/2000 delivered in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985 and other companion appeals and also one another judgment delivered by Division Bench of this Court (Coram : G.D. Patil & V.M. Kanade, JJ) dated 16/10/2001 in First Appeal No. 112 of 1988 alongwith other companion appeals.
8. In the present case, the claimant has examined the expert valuer Mr. Vaidya who has stated that the lands in question were already leveled and, therefore, 20% development charges which were ordered to be deducted from the market value was excessive. In my view, the said submission will have to be accepted. It is an admitted position that the land in question was leveled and, therefore, at the highest, 10% development charges could have been deducted from the market value while making calculations regarding payments to be made to the landlord. Similar view has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court in respect of the lands which are situated at the adjoining area. It is an admitted position that all the lands acquired from different villages are almost adjacent to each other and are situated near Bombay-Pune National Highway.
9. Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act lays down factors which are to be taken into consideration while awarding compensation. The proximity of the land near Highway assumes importance in deciding the market value of the land. Further, the awards which are passed in respect of adjoining lands also have to be taken into consideration. After having perused the judgments on which the reliance has been placed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant, it can be seen that in respect of the lands which are situated at the distance of about 3 to 4 kilometers from the Highway, compensation @ Rs. 18/- per sq. meter has been granted, whereas in respect of the lands which are situated between 100 meters to 1500 meters, the compensation has been awarded at the rate between Rs. 22/- to Rs. 25/- per sq. meter. In the present case, it is no doubt true that the land was situated at a distance of about 1000 meters and in some cases, in such circumstances, the compensation @ Rs. 22/- has been awarded. The judgment on which reliance is placed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State, compensation @ Rs. 15/- per sq. meter has been granted. However, in my view, ratio of the said judgment will not apply to the facts of the present case since the said rate was awarded considering the facts situation in the said case.
10. In the present case, considering the proximity of the land from the Highway as also from the ST Bus Stand, Railway Station and that it was situated near the extended Panvel Municipal Limits, in my view, the appellant is entitled to get compensation @ Rs. 25/- per sq. meter excluding 10% development charges. At the same time, since the award was passed on 14/08/1981, the appellant would be entitled to get 30% solatium under Section 23 Sub-clause (2) and also interest under Section 23(1) A @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% per annum for the further period till the actual date of payment.
11. The First Appeal is accordingly allowed. Judgment and Order passed by the Reference Court is accordingly modified. The First Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
No comments:
Post a Comment