The Land Acquisition Officer v. Shri Damodar Krishna Kamat Tarkar

A.P. Lavande, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rodrigues, learned Additional Government Advocate for the Appellants and Mr. Mulgaonkar, Learned Counsel for the Respondents.

2. By this appeal, the Appellants take exception to the judgment and award dated 31st August, 2000 passed by the Additional District Judge, North Goa, Panaji in Land Acquisition Case No. 45/1986 by which the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (The Act for short) has been partly allowed. Government of Goa issued Notification under Section 4(1) of The Act which was published in the official gazette dated 26th March, 1984 acquiring the lands of several persons for public purpose viz. Pisciculture and paddy cultivation at Chorao. An area of 26,08,373 Hectars belonging to the original Respondent was acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded 0.50 paise per square metre in respect of the acquired land, though the original Respondent claimed Rs. 11/- per square metre. The original Respondent sought reference under Section 18 of The Act and claimed Rs. 11/- per square metre.

3. In Land Acquisition Case No. 45/1986, the original Respondent Damodar Krishna Tarkar examined himself and one Arun Hari Parulekar-AW2, who also produced certain documents. The Respondent produced award at exhibit AW1/A in which he was held entitled to 2/3rd compensation in respect of the acquired land. On behalf of the Appellants -Nandkishor Vernekar -RW1 was examined.

4. After appreciation of the evidence led by the

parties, the Reference Court partly allowed and reference and fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 2/- per square metre.

5. The Appellants have challenged the said award by filing the present appeal.

6. Mr. Mulgaonkar, Learned Counsel for the legal representative of the original Respondent, at the outset, submitted that in respect of another land acquired under the same notification, the Reference Court had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 2/- per square and the same has been maintained by this Court in First Appeal No. 173/2001. Mr. Mulgaonkar further submitted that the acquired land and the land involved in First Appeal No. 173/2001 are similar in all respects and in view of the settled law that when the lands of several persons are acquired by the same notification which are similar in nature, all the parties are entitled to the same compensation, the Respondent is entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 2/- per square metre in respect of the acquired land and, therefore, no interference is warranted with the impugned judgment and award.

7. Mr. Rodrigues, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the Appellants fairly conceded that in First Appeal No. 173/2001 arising out of the acquisition under the same notification and in respect of similar land, this Court has maintained compensation at the rate of Rs. 2/- per square metre.

8. In view of the statement made by Mr. Mulgaonkar which has not been seriously disputed by Mr. Rodrigues and in view of the settled position that when the lands of several persons are acquired by the same notification which are similar in nature all the parties are entitled to same compensation, I am of the considered opinion that the Reference Court was justified in fixing the market rate of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 2/- per square metre. Therefore, no interference is warranted with the impugned judgment and award. Needless to mention that Respondent No. 2 is entitled to 2/3rd share in the compensation. Needless to mention that the Respondent is also entitled to all the statutory benefits under The Act.

9. The amount deposited by the Appellants in the appeal, shall be paid to the Respondents along with accrued interest.

10. The appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs.