FIRST APPEAL NO. 422 OF 2019

11th March 2020

Petitioner Counsel: Shri A. B. Nakshane Shri R. C. Raibhandare
Respondent Counsel: Mrs. K. R. Deshpande

Cases Cited :
Paras 8, 14: Chindha Fakira Patil (D) through L.Rs Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon [AIR 2012 SC 481]
Paras 9, 13: Pramilabai wd/o Manguji Ade (since deceased) and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr., [2018(3) Mh.L.J. 787]

JUDGEMENT

First Appeal No. 422/2019

Heard.

2. Admit.

3. Heard finally with consent of learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

First Appeal Nos. 422 and 1734 of 2019

4. Both these appeals are against the judgment of reference Court in L.A.C. No. 2027/2004 decided by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Darwha, District Yavatmal dated 29-7-2016.

5. The facts in both the appeals can be summarized in short as under :-
(i) Agriculture land Gat No. 13, Area 2 H. 78 R of appellants Ramesh Vasantrao Kale, Vijay Vasantrao Kale and Ashokrao Vasantrao Kale was acquired for Kumbharkinhi Project. Notification under Section 4 was published on 25-6-1999. Land Acquisition Officer passed award on 21-3-2002 and granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 40,000/- per Hectare for agriculture land and Rs. 1075/- per tree for 100 Orange trees, Rs. 511/- per tree for 89 Orange trees and Rs. 56/- per tree for 391 Orange trees.
(ii) The appellants in First Appeal No. 422/2019 not satisfied with the award filed reference before the Court. Reference Court partly allowed the reference and granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000/- per Hectare for irrigated land of 2.09HR, Rs. 1,00,000/- per Hectare for jirayat land of 0.49 HR and Rs. 50,000/- per Hectare for barren (potkharab) land of 0.20 HR. The reference court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 3500/- per tree for 100 Orange trees, Rs. 2500/- per tree for 89 Orange trees, Rs. 500/- per tree for 391 Orange trees, Rs. 200/- per tree for 2 Ber trees and Rs. 500/- per tree for 15 Mango trees. Hence, these appeals by V.I.D.C. and also by the land owners/claimants.

6. Heard learned Advocate Shri Nakshane for the land owners/claimants, Shri Raibhandare, learned Advocate for acquiring body - VIDC and Mrs. Deshpande, learned Assistant Government Pleader for State.

7. Learned Advocate Shri Nakshane has pointed out judgment of this Court in First Appeal No. 74/2006 decided on 3-7-2017 and submitted that this Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 90,000/- per Hectare for dry crop agriculture land situated at Village Kumbharkinhi. In that appeal, notification under Section 4 was published in the year 1996 whereas in present appeal, notification was published in the year 1999. Therefore, 10% per year increase is to be taken into consideration.

8. Learned Advocate Shri Nakshane has pointed out judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chindha Fakira Patil (D) through L.Rs Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon [AIR 2012 SC 481] and submitted that the appellants/claimants are entitled for double the rate of dry crop land. He has submitted that amount of compensation granted to Orange trees is to be increased.

9. Learned Advocate Shri Raibhandare has pointed out judgment of this Court in the case of Pramilabai wd/o Manguji Ade (since deceased) and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. [2018(3) Mh.L.J. 787] and prayed for dismissal of appeal filed by the claimants. He has submitted that the amount of compensation granted by the reference court is excessive.

10. From the perusal of 7/12 extracts filed on record before the reference court vide Exhibit 27 to Exhibit 36, it is clear that the agriculture land of appellants/claimants Gat No. 13 was irrigated land. Entry in column 12 shows that there was 580 Orange trees planted in the year 1989-90. Notification under Section 4 was published in the year 1999. Therefore, It appears that 580 Orange trees were aged about 9-10 years at the time of publication of Section 4 notification. The reference court has granted compensation of Rs. 3500/- per tree for 100 Orange trees, Rs. 2500/- per tree for 89 Orange trees, Rs. 500/- per tree for 391 Orange trees. There is no specific reason as to why same rate is not granted to other trees. As per 7/12 extract, Orange trees were planted in the year 1989-90. At the time of acquiring land, those tress were in existence. The appellant has examined valuer but his evidence was not taken into consideration by the reference court. 7/12 extracts vide Exhibit Nos. 27 to 36 show that all the Orange trees were fruit bearing trees. Therefore, compensation at the rate of Rs. 3500/- per tree for 580 Orange trees is proper.

11. In respect of agricultural land of appellants/claimants, reference court found that some part of land is irrigated and some part is dry crop land. Therefore, reference Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000/- per Hectare for irrigated land of 2.09HR, Rs. 1,00,000/- per Hectare for dry crop land (jirayati) of 0.49 HR and Rs. 50,000/- per Hectare for barren (potkharab) land of 0.20 HR.

12. Learned Advocate Shri Nakshane has pointed out judgment of this Court in First Appeal No. 74/2006. This Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 90,000/- per Hectare for dry crop land. In the cited judgment, notification was published in the year 1996. In the present appeals, notification was published in the year 1999. Therefore 10% increase per year is to be taken into consideration. The reference court has also taken the increase into consideration. If 10% increase per year is taken into consideration, then the price of dry crop land comes to Rs. 1,14,000/- per Hectare. Cited judgment was in respect of acquiring land of Village, Kumbharkinhi which was acquired for Kumbharkinhi Project. In the present appeals also, acquiring land was situated at Village, Kumbharkinhi and acquired for same project. Therefore, appellants are entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,14,000/- per Hectare for dry crop land having area 0.49 HR.

13. Cited decision in the case of Pramilabai wd/o Manguji Ade (since deceased) and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. (supra) is on different footings and not of the same village, hence is not applicable.

14. Learned Advocate Shri Nakshane has pointed out judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chindha Fakira Patil (D) through L.Rs Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon (supra). Hon’ble Apex Court has held that price of irrigated land shall be double as compared to dry crop land. Hon’ble Apex Court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 6,00,000/- per Hectare i.e. double the compensation for dry crop land that is of Rs. 3,00,000/-. In the present case, 7/12 extracts filed on record, Exhibit 27 to Exhibit 36 show that agriculture land area 2.09HR was irrigated land and, therefore, appellants/claimants are entitled for double the compensation of dry crop land i.e. 2,28,000/- per Hectare. In that view of the matter, appeal filed by Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation is dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeal filed by land owners/ claimants is partly allowed. Impugned judgment is modified as under :-
(i) The respondent - acquiring body is directed to pay compensation to the claimants/appellants in First Appeal No. 422/2019 at the rate of Rs. 2,28,000/- per Hectare for irrigated agriculture land area 2.09HR.
(ii) The respondent - acquiring body is directed to pay compensation to the claimants/appellants in First Appeal No. 422/2019 at the rate of Rs. 1,14,000/- for dry crop land of area 0.49 HR.
(iii) The respondent - acquiring body is directed to pay compensation to the claimants/appellants in First Appeal No. 422/2019 at the rate of Rs. 3500/- per tree for 580 Orange trees (i.e. 580x3500 = Rs. 20,30,000).
(iv) Remaining part of the judgment in respect of compensation to Ber trees, Mango trees is maintained as it is.
(v) Other part of the judgment in respect of solatium, interest etc. is maintained as its.

15. The appellant Nos. 1A to 1F, 2 and 3 viz. Sunita wd/o Ramesh Kale, Archana Dyaneshwar Ingole, Sangita Dineshrao Sartape, Umesh Ramesh Kale, Akash Ramesh Kale, Sagar Ramesh Kale, Vijay Vasantrao Kale and Ashokrao Vasantrao Kale are permitted to withdraw the amount of compensation deposited before this Court along with accrued interest, if any.

16. Balance amount, if any, shall be deposited by the respondent – acquiring body before this Court within a period of six months.