Bombay High Court Partly Allows Appeal in Land Acquisition Case — Enhances Compensation for Percolation Dam Acquisition. Consistency with Connected Appeal Leads to Enhanced Rate of Rs.21,400 per Hectare with Statutory Benefits Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 19
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves a first appeal by the original landowner (now represented by legal heirs) against the judgment and award dated 14.11.1994 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana in L.A.C. No.51/1990. The agricultural land of Gat No.20, admeasuring 2 Hectares 63 R, along with a constructed well and trees, situated in village Mahimal, tahsil Chikhli, district Buldhana, was acquired for constructing a percolation dam. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs.24,934 at the rate of Rs.11,000 per hectare and Rs.10,990 for the well. Aggrieved, the appellant sought a reference, which was dismissed on the ground that no case for enhancement was made out. In the connected matter, First Appeal No.120/1995, decided on 22.7.2011, arising out of L.A.C. No.49/1990, this Court had allowed the appeal and enhanced compensation to Rs.21,400 per hectare with all statutory benefits. The appellant's counsel argued for similar enhancement. The Court, to maintain consistency, partly allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned award, and granted compensation at Rs.21,400 per hectare with a 10% annual increase, resulting in Rs.25,680 per hectare, totaling Rs.67,538 for the area. The appellant was also awarded additional amounts under Section 23(1A) (12% per annum from Section 4 notification till award or possession), solatium at 30% under Section 23(2), and interest at 9% per annum for the first year and 15% per annum thereafter, all on the enhanced compensation.

Headnote

A) Land Acquisition - Compensation Enhancement - Consistency in Judicial Decisions - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 23(1A), 23(2) - The appellant sought enhancement of compensation for acquired land, relying on a connected appeal where compensation was fixed at Rs.21,400 per hectare. The Court held that for consistency, similar relief must be granted, and enhanced compensation to Rs.21,400 per hectare with 10% annual increase, solatium, and interest as per the Act. (Paras 1-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation for acquired agricultural land at the same rate as awarded in a connected appeal involving similar land acquisition.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

First Appeal No.116/1995 is partly allowed with proportionate costs. The impugned judgment and award dated 14.11.1994 in L.A.C. No.51/1990 is set aside. The appellant is granted compensation at Rs.21,400 per hectare with 10% annual increase, resulting in Rs.25,680 per hectare, totaling Rs.67,538 for 2 H.63 R. The appellant is also awarded amount under Section 23(1A) at 12% per annum from Section 4 notification till award or possession, solatium at 30% under Section 23(2), and interest at 9% per annum for the first year and 15% per annum thereafter on the enhanced compensation.

Law Points

  • Land acquisition compensation enhancement
  • consistency in judicial decisions
  • market value determination
  • statutory benefits under Land Acquisition Act
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (06) 92

First Appeal No.116 of 1995

2012-06-11

M.N. Gilani, J.

Shri P.B. Patil for appellant, Shri M.A. Kadu A G P for respondent

Gulabrao Daulatrao Yewale (through legal representatives: Smt. Chandrabhaga wd/o Gulabrao Yewale, Sopan Gulabrao Yewale, Deepa Ramchandra Gulabrao Yewale, Jalindar Gulabrao Yewale, Sou. Godavari w/o Raosaheb Parhad, Sou Kokila w/o Nivruthi Thigle)

The Maharashtra State, through Collector, Buldana

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

Nature of Litigation

First appeal against judgment and award in land acquisition reference for enhancement of compensation.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought enhancement of compensation for acquired agricultural land and well.

Filing Reason

Dissatisfaction with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and the Reference Court.

Previous Decisions

The Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.24,934 at Rs.11,000 per hectare and Rs.10,990 for well. The Reference Court dismissed the reference for enhancement. In a connected appeal (First Appeal No.120/1995), this Court enhanced compensation to Rs.21,400 per hectare.

Issues

Whether the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation at the same rate as awarded in a connected appeal.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant's counsel argued that in a connected matter (First Appeal No.120/1995), this Court enhanced compensation to Rs.21,400 per hectare with statutory benefits, and similar enhancement should be granted in this appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

For consistency in judicial decisions, when a connected appeal involving similar land acquisition has been allowed with enhanced compensation at a particular rate, the same rate should be applied to the present appeal to avoid inconsistency.

Judgment Excerpts

In the connected matter i.e. First Appeal No.120/1995 decided on 22.7.2011 and arising out of L.A.C.No.49/1990 this court allowed the appeal and enhanced the amount of compensation @ Rs.21400/ per hectare with all statutory benefits. In order to have consistency, similar relief will have to be granted to the appellant by allowing the appeal partly.

Procedural History

The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation on an unspecified date. The appellant sought a reference, which was dismissed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana on 14.11.1994 in L.A.C. No.51/1990. The appellant filed First Appeal No.116/1995 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The connected appeal (First Appeal No.120/1995) was decided on 22.7.2011. The present appeal was decided on 11.6.2012.

Acts & Sections

  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 23(1A), 23(2)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Revenue's Appeal in Income Tax Reopening Case — CBDT's Rejection of Assessee's Objection Upheld. The Court held that the Assessing Officer's satisfaction based on tangible material is sufficient for reopening under Se...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Partly Allows Appeal in Land Acquisition Case — Enhances Compensation for Percolation Dam Acquisition. Consistency with Connected Appeal Leads to Enhanced Rate of Rs.21,400 per Hectare with Statutory Benefits Under Land Acquisitio...