Prithvinath Kaul vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.

CNR No : HCBM010090582001

2026:BHC-AS:45249

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
First Appeal No.1101 of 2002

Shri Prithvinath Kaul
since deceased through LR.
Vijay P. Kaul
Age 60
r/o Raj Bhavan, Guru Nanak Nagar,
Shankar Sheth Road,
Pune 411002. … Appellant
V/s.
1. The State of Maharashtra
2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer
No.15 -
having office opp. Government
Polytechnic High School,
Ghole Road, Pune 411 004. … Respondents.
Ms. A.R.S. Baxi Advocate for the Appellant
Mr. A.R.Patil Addl.G.P. for the Respondent.
CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J
th
DATE : 5 November 2026.
Digitally
signed by
LATA SUNIL
PANJWANI
Date:
2026.11.05
17:17:21
+0530
LATA
SUNIL
PANJWANI
JUDGMENT:
1. The reference initiated at the instance of the Claimant was
th
dismissed by Court of 5 Extra Joint District Judge, Pune in
1/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
th
L.R.No.89/1992 vide judgment dated 27 July 2001. It is on
account of not making out the case of enhancement. The correctness
of the said judgment is challenged by the claimant by way of this
appeal.
2. So the issue involved in this appeal is whether the claimant has
made out a case for enhancement and whether he has adduced
sufficient evidence to that effect before the Reference Court.
3. On this background I heard learned Advocate Ms. Bakshi for
the Appellant and learned AGP. The relevant facts for our
consideration are as follows:-
A) The land bearing Survey No.18/3/B is situated at Village
Wanwadi, Taluka Haveli. The Appellant is the owner of
the said land.
B) There is a notification issued under Section 4 of the
th
L.A.R. Act on 20 November 1991 for the purpose of
road widening. An area of land admeasuring 115 sq.
meters was decmarcated. The Appellant objected.
C) Respondent No.2 - Special Land Acquisition Officer
No.15 has offered Rs.4,30,702/- at the rate of Rs. 261/-
per sq. meter.
D) The Appellant was not satisfied and hence he requested
the Collector to make a reference under Section 18 of the
2/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
said act. It was made to the District Court, Pune.
4. The Appellant examined following witnesses:-
1) Vijay Prithvinath Kaul – Son of claimant.
2) Akhtar Ahmed Shaikh – Income tax Inspector.
3) Arun Awadhuh Pundlik – Valuer.
4) Mahendra Mahabare, Junior Clerk from office of Sub-Registrar.
5. The State has not adduced any evidence. After appreciating
the evidence the Reference Court held that there was no satisfactory
evidence.
6. Learned Advocate Ms. Bakshi has taken me through the oral
evidence and documentary evidence. She submitted that atleast the
rate fixed by Assistant Director of Town Planning addressed to the
Pune Municipal Corporation ought to have been considered by the
Reference Court. Whereas learned AGP submitted that it cannot be
considered. On the point of not considering the copies of the sale
deed not being the certified copies, learned AGP relied upon
observations in case of Cement Corporation of India Ltd. v/s. Purya
1.
and others
7. With their assistance, I have gone through record. Though
Vijay Kaul deposed about plan submitted to Corporation, it is not
produced in Court. He has also not deposed that it was sanctioned.
It was very much necessary in order to ascertain use of the land
1 (2004) 8 Supreme Court Cases 270
3/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
present and its potentiality. However, that evidence is not available.
8. Date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
th
Act is 4 September 1991. The Court has to ascertain the market
value of the acquired land on said date. Son of Claimant tendered
th th
copies of sale deeds dated 6 April 1994 and 17 October 1989
(answered in Para-8 of Cross). Reference Court has not considered
them. Miss Baxi submitted that they are photocopies of the original
sale deeds. It is true when any owner looses his land in acquisition,
he is sufferer. He has to fight with Government firstly by way of
objection and then for getting correct compensation. He cannot get
it merely by asking. He has to prove his case by producing authentic
materials. The claimant did made an attempt to collect copies of
sale deeds. But when claim for compensation has to be decided,
Court has to ascertain whether document is legally admissible.
9. Supreme Court in case of Cement Corporation (supra) has
dealt with the controversy about proof of contemporary sale
instances. It is true there are rules of proof of documentary evidence
as per Evidence Act. They are referred. Supreme Court commented
on special provisions of Section 51-A of Land Acquisition Act
amended by Act No.68 of 1994. As per Section 51-A, two
documents can be accepted as evidence of the transactions in the
documents. They are:-
a) Certified copy of document which is registered under
Registration Act.
4/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
b) Copy given under Section 57 of Registration Act on
inspection.
10. Admittedly, copies of sale deeds are not certified copies of sale
deeds. They are registered. It is held if there are certified copies then
Court can draw presumption of the contents even though executant
of document is not examined (Para-31). Altogether it is rebuttable
presumption. In view of these observations, I am unable to accept
the submission of Miss Baxi.
11. Second piece of evidence is evidence of valuer Arun Pundlik.
From his report we can gather that area of acquired plot 200 ft. in
length and 60 ft. in width. He admits development of land is not
possible as there is no road. He has opined market price of the land
in that area is Rs.1500/- to Rs.2000/- per square meter. He has given
this opinion on the basis of enquiry made in sub-registrar office.
However, he has not obtained any certificate for sub-registrar office.
Even he has not seen any sale deeds to ascertain market rate. No
doubt opinion is relevant but it has to be given on the basis of
materials and not on the basis of surmises.
12. It is settled law that expert opinion can be relied if materials
referred by him are produced and they are genuine. No doubt
materials referred by him are relevant but they were not produced
before the reference Court. In view of this, expert opinion cannot be
considered.
5/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
13. It is true that Akhtar Shaikh is examined in order to prove the
sell of the property conducted in auction. It was due to
undervaluation of the consideration. The property is situated at
Hadapsar. However, he has not produced any document. Oral
evidence without the document has no value. The document is
required so that Court can ascertain the proximity in time and in
location. This evidence cannot be considered in support of the claim
for enhancement.
14. Last piece of evidence is evidence of junior clerk from sub-
registrar office. He has produced copy of chart prepared by Asst.
Director of Town Planning for the purpose of valuation of lands for
the purpose of stamping of documents for registration purpose.
Learned Advocate Miss Baxi has put more stress on rates mentioned
therein and she submitted that even concerned witness is also
examined.
15. Learned AGP submitted such rates cannot be considered for
determining market value for compensation under Land Acquisition
Act. He is right. Supreme Court in case of Jawajee Nagnatham v.
2
Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad has dealt with this issue (Para-
5). Hence, his evidence is not of any use.
16. Certainly Appellant tried his best to collect materials and prove
it in Court, the reference Court found certain shortcomings in them.
I agree with the same for reasons given hereinafter.
2 (1994) 4 SCC 595
6/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40

fa 1101.02.doc
LSP
17. The award is cryptic but the conclusion cannot be faulted. We
are bound by rules of evidence. I find no fault in the conclusion
drawn by the reference Court. I appreciate the efforts made by
learned Advocate Miss Baxi but those efforts are not sufficient to
convince me to take a view against the judicial interpretation given
by the Constitutional Courts.
18. Hence, I find no merit in the appeal. It is dismissed without
any order of costs.
(S.M. MODAK, J.)
7/7
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 17:31:40
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)