JUDGMENT:- Heard Mr. Dalal, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr. S. P. Dound, learned AG.P, for Respondents. 2. The present First Appeal preferred by the original claimant against the Judgment and award dated 20th January. 1995 passed by Joint Civil Judge. Senior Division, Parbhani in L.AR. No.162 of 1989. 3. The undisputed facts are that Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short "S.L.AO.") issued Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 26th Juue, 1986 for acquiring Respondent's/ original claimant's land from Survey No.63/l15 of village Girgaon (Bk.), Tq.-Jintoor, Dist. Parbhani for construction of percolation tank. After following due process of law, the S.L.A.O. declared the award dated 24th February, 1988 and awarded compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 7,000/- per Hector i.e. Rs.2,800/- per Acre. Being aggrieved by the said award, the Appellant original claimant preferred Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and in the said Reference, the Reference Court awarded enhanced compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per Acre i.e. at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per Hector. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and award passed by the Reference Court, the Appellant preferred present Appeal in this Court. 4. Mr. Dalal. learned counsel for Appellant submits that the Reference Court erred in coming to the conclusion that the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per Acre only. He submitted that the Reference Court should have held that the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per Acre. Learned counsel for Appellant submitted that in support of the claimant's claim the claimant has relied on two sale instances i.e. sale instance dated 3rd March. 1986 at Exhibit 26 and sale instance dated 15th March, 1982 at Exhibit 28. He further contended that as per Exhibit 26 the land admeasuring 3 Acres, 13 Gunthas was sold for Rs. 48,000/- from Girgaon i.e. at the rate of Rs.14.436/- per Acre; whereas second sale instance Exhibit 28 is in respect of 70 Rs. of land. In this sale instance the land sold for Rs. 25,000/- on 15th March, 1982 i.e. at the rate of Rs. 14,285/- per Acre. He further submitted that village Girgaon is situated on Jintoor-Parbhani High way. 48,000/- from Girgaon i.e. at the rate of Rs.14.436/- per Acre; whereas second sale instance Exhibit 28 is in respect of 70 Rs. of land. In this sale instance the land sold for Rs. 25,000/- on 15th March, 1982 i.e. at the rate of Rs. 14,285/- per Acre. He further submitted that village Girgaon is situated on Jintoor-Parbhani High way. The facilities of electricity, school, primary health centre were available at village Girgaon when Notification under Section 4 carne to be issued on 26th June, 1986. He further submitted that the land under acquisition is black soil fertile land. It is the case of the Appellant that the acquired land used to fetch annual income at the rate of Rs. 7,500/- to Rs.8,000/- per Acre per annum. The Appellant further submitted that he used to get double crops from the acquired land. On the basis of these submissions, learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that Appellant/original claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per Acre. 5. Mr. Dalal, learned counsel for Appellant further submitted that the Respondents actually acquired 4 Hectors of land from Gut No.63/l55; whereas S.L.A.O. as well as the Reference Court awarded compensation in respect of 2 Hectors, 40 R of land only. He further submitted that the Appellant made application before the Reference Court for appointing Land Survey Officer to measure the acquired land. On the said application, the Reference Court passed an order and directed the Surveyor in the office of D.I.L.R. at Parbhani to visit the land and carry out the measurement. Pursuant to the said order, the Surveyor carried out the measurement of acquired land and filed his report along with map at Exhibit 36 in the present case. The Surveyor also carried out Panchanama at the time of measurement and submitted copy of Panchanama which is at Exhibit 35 dated 28th February. 1994. It is the case of the Appellant that the Surveyor specifically stated in his report that the acquired land comes to 3 Hector and 75 Rs. Inspite of the said report of Surveyor, the Reference Court erred in corning to the conclusion that the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of 2 Hectors and 40 Rs. only. 6. On the other hand. Mr. Inspite of the said report of Surveyor, the Reference Court erred in corning to the conclusion that the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of 2 Hectors and 40 Rs. only. 6. On the other hand. Mr. S.P. Dound, learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of the Respondent - State vehemently opposed the present Appeal on the ground that the Appellant/original claimant failed to produce any cogent evidence on record to show that the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per Acre. Learned A.G.P. further submitted that the sale deeds at Exhibits 26 and 28 are not relevant in the present case for fixing the market value of the acquired land. 7. On the above mentioned facts and circumstances, following two issues arises for determination in the present case: ISSUES (i) Whether the Appellant proves that the Respondent State acquired 4 Hectors of land from Survey No.63/155 of village Girgaon (Bk.)? (ii) Whether the Reference Court failed to consider the Appellant's contention for enhanced compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per Acre? FINDINGS (i) Only 3 Hector 75 Rs orland acquired. (ii)No. 8. The learned counsel for Appellant submitted that in the present case the Respondent - State actually acquired 4 Hectors of land from Survey No.63/155 from village Girgaon (Bk.), Taluka-Jintoor. Dist-Parbhani for their project. Though the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 26th June, 1986 shows only 2 Hectors and 40 Rs of land, actually the Respondents took possession of 4 Hectors of land and therefore the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of 4 Hectors of land. He further submitted that the claimant applied in trial Court for appointment of Surveyor and pursuant to the said application, the trial Court directed Surveyor from the Office of D.I.L.R. Parbhani to carry out the survey and submit the report. The said report shows that the Respondents acquired 3 Hectors and 75 Rs of land from Gut No.155. 9. With the help of the learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through Exhibit 34 i.e. evidence of Surveyor and Exhibit 35 i.e. Panchanama prepared by the Surveyor at the time of carrying out survey and Exhibit 36 which is a map prepared by Surveyor after carrying out actual measurement of the acquired land. 9. With the help of the learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through Exhibit 34 i.e. evidence of Surveyor and Exhibit 35 i.e. Panchanama prepared by the Surveyor at the time of carrying out survey and Exhibit 36 which is a map prepared by Surveyor after carrying out actual measurement of the acquired land. It is to be noted that the Reference Court in Para II of the Judgment specifically recorded that: "I have carefully perused the panchanama, report of Surveyor and measurement plan. In the said measurement plant, the Surveyor has shown the pink and blue colour as land under acquisition admeasuring 3 H, 75 R out of Gat No.155. Therefore, I have no hesitation to hold that objection of the petitioner for measurement of land through D.I.L.R. is proper." 10. Though the Reference Court recorded this finding in its Judgment, yet at the time of passing the final order, the Reference Court granted compensation in respect of 2 Hectors and 40 Rs only. I have gone carefully through Exhihit 35 which is a Panchanama prepared by the Surveyor dated 28th February, 1994. In the said Panchanama, all five Panchas have specifically pointed out the acquired land in the present case. The report dated 28th February. 2004 submitted by Mr. Ramkisan Tukaram Sawandkar, Surveyor from the office of the D.LL.R. Parbhani specifically states that Respondent State acquired 3 Hectors and 75 Rs land from Gut No.155. Along with said report, he submitted plan at Exhibit 36 showing the Appellant's acquired land admeasuring 3 Hectors and 75 R. The Appellant for the purpose of proving the Panchanama and plan prepared by the Surveyor, called the said officer as a witness. The Surveyor Ramkisan Tukaram Sawandkar examined at Exhibit 34 by the Appellant. The said witness specifically stated that after the order of measurement passed by the D.LL.R. pursuant to the notice issued by the Reference Court, he carried out Survey on 28th February, 1994 along with Panchas. He himself prepared Panchanama which is at Exhibit 3S. He also prepared map showing the acquired land, which is at Exhibit 36. He stated that the red colour portion in the said map indicates the acquired area of Gut No.155 initially (2 Hectors, 40 Rs for the tank. Green color portion shows the excess area of land of Gut No.155 (1 Hector. 35 Rs). acquired for the purpose of tank. He stated that the red colour portion in the said map indicates the acquired area of Gut No.155 initially (2 Hectors, 40 Rs for the tank. Green color portion shows the excess area of land of Gut No.155 (1 Hector. 35 Rs). acquired for the purpose of tank. He specifically stated that the total portion of the land acquired for the tank is 3 Hector and 75 Rs. In the cross-examination, he has only stated that he has not brought any evidence on the date of giving deposition in the Court to show that the notices were served on Collector for carrying out the measurement. 11. Here we have to consider one thing that the Surveyor was appointed from D.LLR. Office which is a Office run by the Government. In other words, it is clear that the report submitted by Government Officer showing that the acquired land is 3 Hector and 75 Rs. In view of these facts and circumstances. I hold that the Reference Court erred in awarding compensation in respect of.2 Hectors and 40 Rs only. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 reads as under: "18. (1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award (or the amendment) thereof may by written application to the Collector. require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested. (2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award (or the amendment) is taken; Provided that every such application shall be made.- (a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award (or the amendment) within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award (or the amendment). (b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under section 12, sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award (or the amendment), whichever period shall first expire. (b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under section 12, sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award (or the amendment), whichever period shall first expire. (3)Any order made by the Collector on an application under this section shall be subject to revision by the High Court, as if the Collector were a Court subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (5 of 1908)." 12. Under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act there are 4 types of disputes which can be referred to the Civil Court for determination. They are (i) as to the measurement of the land, (ii) as to the amount of compensation, (iii) as to the person to whom the compensation is payable or (iv) as to the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested. Therefore, it is clear from Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act that Reference Court should have considered the submissions made by the Appellant/original claimant in respect of dispute about the area acquired by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Though the Reference Court specifically held in Para II of the Judgment that, the Surveyor from the office of the D.LLR. specifically stated that the Government acquired 3 Hectors. 75 Rs of land out of Gut No.115, inspite of that the Reference Court failed to award compensation to the Appellant/original claimant for his acquired land admeasuring 3 Hectors 75 Rs. On the basis of the above facts and circumstances, the Appellant is entitled to compensation in respect of 3 Hectors and 75 Rs of land which was actually acquired. Therefore, Issue No.1 is answered accordingly. 13. For determining the market value in respect of the acquired land, the claimant produced certified copies of sale deed dated 31st March, 1986 at Exhibit 26 in respect on Acres and 13 Gunthas land sold for Rs,48.0001-. By this sale deed the land was sold at the rate of Rs. 14,436/- per Acre. It is to be noted that the land involved under the said sale deed is from Girgaon (Kh.) i.e. near about 2 and 1/2 furlong away from Girgaon (Bk.), In similar way the sale deed Exhibit 28 dated 15th March. 1982 is in respect of 70 Rs of land, Said 70 Rs of land was sold for Rs. It is to be noted that the land involved under the said sale deed is from Girgaon (Kh.) i.e. near about 2 and 1/2 furlong away from Girgaon (Bk.), In similar way the sale deed Exhibit 28 dated 15th March. 1982 is in respect of 70 Rs of land, Said 70 Rs of land was sold for Rs. 25,000/- i,e, at the rate of Rs. 14,285/- per Acre, This sale deed is also from village Girgaon (Kh,), It is to be noted that the Appellant has not produced any sale deed from village Girgaon (Bk,) from where the lands were acquired by the Respondent State for public purpose. The Reference Court considering these two sale deeds, awarded compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per Hector. I do not find any infirmity in the said conclusion drawn by the Reference Court in awarding compensation in respect of acquired land at the rate of Rs, 15,000/- per Hector, because the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act is dated 26th June, 1986 and the sale instances produced by the Appellant himself are of the year 1986 and 1982 and both the sale instances are from other village. Therefore, whatever amount awarded by the Reference Court in respect of acquired land in favour of the claimant. is as per market value as on the date of issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, Issue No.2 is answered in the negative. 14. In the above mentioned facts and circumstances, the Appeal preferred by the Appellants is party allowed to the extent that the claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of acquired land admeasuring 3 Hectors and 75 Rs instead of 2 Hectors and 40 Rs. Needless to state that the Appellant is entitled to all other benefits as per amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act Hence the Order: ORDER (i) First Appeal No.38 of 1996 preferred by the original claimant is partly allowed to the extent that Appellant/original claimant is entitled to compensation in respect of 3 Hectors and 75 Rs of land at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per Hector i.e. Rs.6000/- per Acre, instead of for 2 Hectors and 40 Rs of land. 15,000/- per Hector i.e. Rs.6000/- per Acre, instead of for 2 Hectors and 40 Rs of land. (ii) The Appellant is entitled to additional benefits as per amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (iii) Appellant is entitled for proportionate cost of the present Appeal (iv) Award be drawn accordingly. Appeal partly allowed.