High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses State's Appeal in Land Acquisition Compensation Case — Upholds Enhanced Compensation Based on Comparable Sale Deed. Reference Court's reliance on sale deed of a developed plot 800 meters away from acquired land held proper under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA In Favour of Accused
  • 6
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The State of Goa appealed against the judgment and award dated 3/7/2002 of the Additional District Judge, Margao in Land Acquisition Case No.35 of 1993, which enhanced compensation for acquisition of 400 sq.metres of land in Raia village from Rs.30/- per sq.metre awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer to Rs.100/- per sq.metre. The land was acquired for construction of Sonarvado-Colledongor road vide notification dated 28/11/1986 published on 15/1/1987. The respondents claimed Rs.400/- per sq.metre and Rs.4000/- for mango trees. The Reference Court relied on a sale deed dated 9/4/1987 (Exhibit AW.1/A) for a developed plot of 400 sq.metres sold at Rs.100/- per sq.metre, situated about 800 metres from the acquired land. The vendor in that sale deed, N.T. Joseph (AW.2), testified. The appellants did not examine any witness. The High Court found no error in the Reference Court's approach, noting that the sale deed was a comparable instance and the acquired land was also suitable for development, thus no deduction for development was required. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Land Acquisition - Compensation - Market Value - Comparable Sale Deed - Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The Reference Court enhanced compensation from Rs.30/- to Rs.100/- per sq.metre relying on a sale deed dated 9/4/1987 for a developed plot 800 meters away. The High Court held that the sale deed was a comparable instance and the deduction for development was not warranted as the acquired land was also suitable for development. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 4-6)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Reference Court was justified in enhancing compensation from Rs.30/- to Rs.100/- per sq.metre based on a sale deed of a developed plot situated 800 meters away from the acquired land.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the appeal with no order as to costs, upholding the Reference Court's award of Rs.100/- per sq.metre.

Law Points

  • Land Acquisition
  • Compensation
  • Comparable Sale Deed
  • Market Value
  • Section 18 Land Acquisition Act 1894
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2010 LawText (BOM) (09) 92

First Appeal no.195 of 2003

2010-09-24

A. P. Lavande

2010:BHC-GOA:2391

Ms. S. Linhares, Additional Government Advocate for the Appellants; Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Respondents

State of Goa through the Dy. Collector and S.D.O, Mormugao, Vasco-da-Gama and The Executive Engineer, W.D. VI (R& B) P.W.D.), Fatorda, Margao-Goa

Fr. Antonio Figueredo (since deceased) represented by Lrs, Dr. Antonio Colaco and Smt. Carman Colaco

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against enhancement of compensation in land acquisition reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Remedy Sought

Appellants (State) sought to set aside the Reference Court's award enhancing compensation from Rs.30/- to Rs.100/- per sq.metre.

Filing Reason

Dissatisfaction with the Reference Court's enhancement of compensation based on a sale deed of a developed plot 800 meters away.

Previous Decisions

Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.30/- per sq.metre on 24/09/1989; Reference Court enhanced to Rs.100/- per sq.metre on 3/7/2002.

Issues

Whether the Reference Court was justified in relying on a sale deed of a developed plot 800 meters away to determine market value of acquired land. Whether any deduction for development was warranted.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the sale deed relied upon was for a developed plot and not comparable to the acquired land which was undeveloped. Respondents supported the Reference Court's reliance on the sale deed and argued that the acquired land was also suitable for development.

Ratio Decidendi

A sale deed of a developed plot situated 800 meters away from the acquired land can be a comparable instance for determining market value under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and no deduction for development is required if the acquired land is also suitable for development.

Judgment Excerpts

The Reference Court placed reliance upon sale deed dated 9/4/1987 (Exhibit AW.1/A) by which an area of 400 sq.metres was sold at the rage of Rs.100/- per sq.metre. The said plot was at a distance of about 800 metres from the acquired land. In my opinion, the Reference Court was justified in placing reliance upon the said sale deed.

Procedural History

Notification dated 28/11/1986 published on 15/1/1987 for acquisition of land for road construction. Land Acquisition Officer made award on 24/09/1989 granting Rs.30/- per sq.metre. Respondents sought reference under Section 18, claiming Rs.400/- per sq.metre. Reference Court (Additional District Judge, Margao) partly allowed reference on 3/7/2002, enhancing compensation to Rs.100/- per sq.metre. State filed First Appeal No.195 of 2003 in High Court of Bombay at Goa, which was dismissed on 24/09/2010.

Acts & Sections

  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 18
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses State's Appeal in Land Acquisition Compensation Case — Upholds Enhanced Compensation Based on Comparable Sale Deed. Reference Court's reliance on sale deed of a developed plot 800 meters away from acquired land...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses State's Appeal and Victim's Revision in Murder Case Due to Unreliable Evidence. Acquittal of Accused Upheld as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 302, 307, 324, 323, 147, 148, 149 of I...