THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusCHAMPABAI AMRUTLAL THAKKAR

                                                                            4-fa-369-99.doc

Urmila Ingale

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                  FIRST APPEAL NO.369 OF 1999


                The State of Maharashtra                            .. Appellant
                           Versus
                Champabai Amrutlal Thakkar and ors.                 .. Respondents

                                          ....................
                 Mr. A.R. Patil, Addl. GP for Appellant.
                 None for the Respondent.
                                              ...................

                                             CORAM : S.M.MODAK, J.

                                             DATE          : SEPTEMBER 17, 2026
                P.C.:

                1.        Heard Mr. A.R. Patil, learned Addl. GP for Appellant.

                None is present on behalf of the Respondents.


                2.         The Special Land Acquisition Officer has offered a rate

                of Rs.73/- per square meter as per his Award dated 30 th July

                1983.    Whereas, the Reference Court i.e. the Court of Joint

                District Judge, Nashik in a Land Reference No. 65 of 1984 made

                at the instance of the Claimant has enhanced the rate to Rs.300/-

                per square meter. This Award is challenged by State by way of

                present Appeal.      Learned Add.GP has taken me through the

                contents of the Judgment. According to him, when the Reference


                                                                                    1 of 4
                                                         4-fa-369-99.doc


Court has not accepted the documents to prove the sale deed of

contemporary period and when the Reference Court has not

accepted the evidence of Valuer, he ought not to have enhanced

the rate to Rs. 300/- per square meter.


3.         It is true that the land is notified as per provisions of

Section 6 of Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act on 30 th

July 1981. It is for the purpose of extension of municipal school

building at Nashik. It has come in the evidence that there is

encroachment by way of huts on the acquired land. The City

Survey number of land is 5865/14-A and it is situated in

Panchavati area of Nashik town.


4.         The Claimants have given the evidence through the

Claimant Dilip Thakkar and Architect-cum-Valuer Mr. Jayant

Wabhari.     The Claimant placed reliance on the sale deeds at

Exhibits 62 & 63. However, they were not certified copies but

the photo copies.     The Reference Court has rightly refused to

consider them as they do not satisfy the test laid down as per the

provisions of Section 51A of the Land Acquisition Act.            The

Reference Court has refused to consider the rate of Rs.554/- per

square meter as determined by the Valuer.          The Valuer had



                                                                 2 of 4
                                                         4-fa-369-99.doc


visited the CTS No. 5865/14-A and he had gone through the

Index II maintained in the office of Sub-Registrar and that is how

calculated the average. This is not accepted by the Reference

Court.


5.       At the same time, the Reference Court has opined that

the acquired land is having non-agricultural potentiality because

the Claimants have submitted a plan for development, however,

they have not started with the construction. The Reference Court

was fully conscious of deduction towards the development

charges. One third of the land will be consumed for keeping

open space and internal road. That is why the Reference Court

opined that the rate submitted by the Valuer at Rs. 544/- is on

the higher side. After appreciating the evidence, the Reference

Court opined that the rate offered by the Special Land

Acquisition Officer is on the lower side and enhanced it to

Rs.300/- per square meter.      This was done primarily for the

reason that the land has got high non-agricultural potentiality.


6.       If this matter is considered, this Court feels that the rate

enhanced by the Reference Court is on proper appreciation of

evidence. The Claimants need to be granted rate which they will



                                                                 3 of 4
                                                     4-fa-369-99.doc


fetch if the land is sold in the open market and when the

prospective purchaser will offer the rate. This Court feels that

there is no error in enhancement order by the Reference Court.

Hence, I do not find any merit in the Appeal. The Appeal is

dismissed.


                                             [ S.M.MODAK, J. ]




                                                             4 of 4