MONOHAR NAGNATH SHINDE.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH THE COLLECTOR, LATUR AND ANR.

2026:BHC-AUG:46206
                                                                         17-CA-11282-2026.odt
                                                 1

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     17 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11282 OF 2026 IN FA/58/2005

                             Harikishan Nagnath Shinde (Deceased)
                             Through His L.Rs. Meenabai And Others.
                                            VERSUS
               The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Collector, Latur And Another.

                                            WITH
                      CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11283 OF 2026 IN FA/58/2005
                             Harikishan Nagnath Shinde (Deceased)
                             Through His L.Rs. Meenabai And Others
                                            VERSUS
               The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Collector, Latur And Another
                                              ……

                     18 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11284 OF 2026 IN FA/59/2005

                                   Monohar Nagnath Shinde.
                                           VERSUS
                                  The State Of Maharashtra,
                            Through The Collector, Latur And Another

                                               ……
          Mr. Kalyan V. Patil, Advocate for the Appellant-Claimant
          Mr. B.A. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State in FA/58/2005
          Mr. S.S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State in FA/59/2005
                                               ……

                                          CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                          DATE       : 28 SEPTEMBER, 2026
          PER COURT :

          ORDER IN CA/11282/2026 IN FA/58/2005 & CA/11284/2026 IN FA/59/2005 :

          1.      Present Civil Applications are filed for restoration of the respective

          First Appeals by condoning delay.


          2.      The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the First Appeals
                                                                 17-CA-11282-2026.odt
                                       2

were dismissed for want of prosecution as the counsel of appellants could

not attend the Court due to health problem.


3.     Considering the averments made in the applications, the same are

allowed, appeals are restored and delay is condoned subject to condition

that the claimants shall not be entitled to statutory benefits and interest

from the date of dismissal i.e. 17.01.2018 of respective First Appeals till this

date i.e. 28.09.2026.


ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11283/2026 IN FA/58/2005 :

4.     The present Civil Application is filed for bringing legal heirs of

deceased appellant by condoning delay of 3008 days by setting aside the

abatement order, if any.


5.     Considering the averments made in the application, the same is

allowed in terms of prayer clauses (B), (C) and (D). Amendment to be

carried out accordingly.


ORDER IN FA/58/2005 AND FA/59/2005 :

6.     Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.


7.     The present appeals arise out of the common impugned Judgment

and Award dated04.10.2004 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior

Division, Nilanga, in Land Acquisition References No.877 of 1998 and 879 of

1998 and other connected LARs.
                                                                  17-CA-11282-2026.odt
                                      3


3.     The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a

copy of the order dated 04.08.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal

No.57 of 2005 and connected matters. He submits that the land of the

appellant was acquired from the same village, i.e. Masalga, for the same

public purpose, namely, Masalga Medium Project, under the very same

notification and pursuant to the same Judgment and Award as involved in

the said appeals. It is, therefore, contended that the controversy involved in

the present appeal is squarely covered by the said order, and consequently,

the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof.


4.     The learned AGPs appearing for respondent-State in respective First

Appeals fairly concede the aforesaid position.


5.     Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel

for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the

controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by

this Court vide order dated 04.08.2026 passed in First Appeal No.57 of 2005

and connected matters, I see no reason to take a different view. The present

appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment

and order. Hence, the following order:


                                ORDER

(i)     The First Appeal Nos.58 and 59 of 2005 are partly allowed.
                                                                    17-CA-11282-2026.odt
                                          4

(ii)       The claimants are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.2,888/-

per R for irrigated land and Rs.1,444/- per R for dry land, as per the

categorization made by the learned Reference Court. To that extent, the

impugned Judgment and Award stands modified.


(iii)      Rest of the award passed by the learned Reference Court stands

confirmed.


(iv)       Modified award be drawn accordingly.


(v)        Deficit Court fee be paid.


(vi)       The amount of enhanced compensation shall be paid after adjusting

the amount already paid to the claimants, if any.


(vii)      The claimants shall not be entitled to statutory benefits and interest

from the date of dismissal of respective First Appeals till this date i.e.

28.09.2026.


(viii)     Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.




                                               [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
                                                         JUDGE


S P Rane