Bombay High Court
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, OSMANABAD THR GMIDC, AURANGABADversusFULCHAND MARUTI DHOLE
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The appeal is dismissed; the cross‑objection is allowed and compensation is fixed at Rs.3,000 per R with interest as per Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Summary
The acquiring body appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against a 2012 judgment that awarded Rs.1,500 per R to the claimant for Bagayat land. The claimant filed a cross‑objection seeking enhancement of compensation. The court noted a prior decision (First Appeal No.770 of 2013) that held Bagayat land holders are entitled to Rs.3,000 per R. Both parties agreed that the land fell under the Bagayat category and should be valued at Rs.3,000 per R. The court dismissed the appeal, allowed the cross‑objection, set compensation at Rs.3,000 per R, and ordered interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Act as per State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari, while denying interest for the delayed period. The acquiring body must deposit the enhanced amount with interest within six months and the record is to be sent back to the reference court for a revised award.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation for Bagayat land should be enhanced from Rs.1,500 per R to Rs.3,000 per R.
- Whether interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is payable on the enhanced compensation.
- Whether the appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act should be dismissed.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34, 54
Subjects
- Land acquisition
- Compensation enhancement
- Bagayat land
- Section 54
- Section 28
- Section 34
- Cross‑objection
- Interest
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42048
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
FIRST APPEAL NO.3783 OF 2023
1] The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad,
through Godawari Marathwada irrigation
Development Corporation, Aurangabad
2] The State of Maharashtra … Appellants
Through Collector, Osmanabad (Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Fulchand Maruti Dhole
Age : 58 years, Occu : Agri,
R/o. Patoda, Tal. Osmanabad, … Respondent
Dist. Osmanabad (Orig. Claimant)
…..
Shri. Arvind N. Gaddime, Advocate for the Appellants
Shri. V. V. Ingale, Advocate for the Respondent
…..
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2822 OF 2017
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO.3783 OF 2023
…..
AND
X OBJECTION (ST) NO.15701 OF 2024
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO.3783 OF 2023
Fulchand Maruti Dhole
Age : 58 years, Occu : Agri,
R/o. Patoda, Tal. & Dist.
Osmanabad … Appellant
(Respt in FA)
Versus
1] The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad,
Dist. Osmanabad
through Godawari Marathwada irrigation
Development Corporation, Aurangabad
2
2] The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Osmanabad .. Respondents
(Orig. Appellants in FA)
…..
Shri. V. V. Ingale, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri. Arvind N. Gaddime, Advocate for the Respondents
……
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
Dated : SEPTEMBER 07, 2026
FINAL ORDER :-
1. This is an Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 (for short, ‘L.A. Act’) preferred by the Acquiring Body against the
Judgment and Award dated 18.12.2012 passed by the learned
3rd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Osmanabad, (hereinafter referred to
as the ‘Reference Court’) in Land Acquisition Reference No.701/2002.
2. The Claimant – Cross objector has filed Cross-objection for
enhancement in the compensation determined by the Reference Court.
3. Suffice it to note that, the land of the Claimant was Bagayat land.
The Reference Court granted compensation @ Rs.1,500/- per R towards
enhancement. The said enhancement is under challenge in the present
First Appeal.
4. When the matter is taken up for hearing Shri. Gaddime, the
learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body and Shri. Ingle, the learned
Advocate for the Claimant place on record copy of the Judgment and
3
order dated 27.07.2026 passed by this Court in bunch of First Appeals
led by First Appeal No.770 of 2013.
5. It is pointed out by Shri. Ingle, the learned Advocate for the
Claimant that the cited matters arose out of the same land acquisition
proceedings. He submits that after considering the earlier orders cited by
the parties, this Court held that the Bagayat land holders entitled for
compensation @ Rs.3000/- per R. He further submits that the present
matter is also covered by the said Judgment and order. He submits that
the Cross-objection may accordingly be allowed by enhancing the
compensation to Rs.3000/- per R and First Appeal preferred by the
Acquiring Body be dismissed.
6. Shri Gaddime, the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body fairly
accepts that the subject matter of the cited First Appeals arise out of the
same acquisition proceedings, which is subject matter of present Appeal.
7. On a specific query, it is agreed by the learned Advocate for the
Acquiring Body that the Claimant’s land falls under the category of
Bagayat land and it would fetch correct valuation @ Rs.3000/- per R in
view of the cited order.
8. Having regard to the aforesaid, I pass the following order.
4
ORDER
[A] The First Appeal stands dismissed.
[B](i) The Cross-objection is allowed.
(ii) The Claimant – Cross objector is entitled to
compensation at the rate of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees
Three Thousand only) per R for his Bagayat land.
(iii) The Claimant shall be entitled to interest under
Sections 28 and 34 of the L.A. Act in terms of law
laid down by Full Bench of this Court in the case of
State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari.
2016 AIR (Bom.) 141.
(iv) The Claimant shall not be entitled to interest and
statutory benefit for delayed period.
(v) Save and except above, impugned Judgment and
Award passed by Reference Court shall stand
unaltered.
(vi) The Acquiring Body shall deposit the enhanced
compensation with accrued interest and in above
terms in this Court within Six (6) Months. Upon
deposit, the Claimant shall be entitled to withdraw
the same with accrued interest, subject to payment
of deficit Court fees.
(vii) Needless to mention that after calculating the
interest as per the Kailash Shiva Rangari’s (supra)
case the excess amount, if any, shall be returned
to the Acquiring Body along with interest.
5
(viii) The Record and Proceedings be sent back to
Reference Court.
(ix) Award be drawn up accordingly.
[C] Pending Civil Application, if any, stands disposed of.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. )
GGP
Checking your session…