Bombay High Court
THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusSHIVALAL VEDU KOLI
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The appeal is dismissed as there is no reason to intervene with the impugned order.
Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal against a 2009 judgment and award in LAR No. 421/1993 concerning a 1988 land acquisition proceeding. The appeal challenged the award on the ground that the compensation enhanced by the reference court exceeded the limit set by a State Government resolution, which permits enhancement only up to four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The learned Advocate General for the State submitted that the enhanced compensation did not exceed this four‑fold ceiling. The Court, after considering the resolution dated 03‑11‑2016 and its corrigenda, found no basis to intervene in the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and any pending civil applications were disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court should intervene in the award where the compensation enhancement does not exceed four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer as per the State Government resolution.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- condonation of delay
- appeal
- government resolution
- civil application
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:46262
CA 4549/12
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
934 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4549 OF 2012
IN FAST/6847/2012
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
VERSUS
SHIVALAL VEDU KOLI
...
AGP for Applicants/State : Mr. A.D. Wange
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4550 OF 2012
IN FAST/6847/2012
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : September 30, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Civil application is filed by the State for condonation of delay in filing
the appeal. For the averments made in the application, the application is
allowed. Delay is condoned.
2. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 1988, heard finally with
the consent of the learned AGP for State.
3. By this appeal, the Appellant assails the Judgment and award dated
6.10.2009 passed by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-1, Amalner in LAR
No. 421/1993.
4. The learned AGP for the State submit that the compensation
enhanced by the learned Reference Court does not exceed four times the
amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and having regard to the policy
decision of the State Government contained in Government Resolution
No.Sankirna-2014/Prak.Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4 dated 03.11.2016 with
CA 4549/12
2
Corrigendum dated 23.02.2017 and 13.08.2018 to the said Government
Resolution, took a decision not to challenge the reference, if compensation
is enhanced only upto four times.
6. Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the impugned
order. Hence, the present Appeal is dismissed.
7. In view of dismissal of Appeal, pending Civil Applications, if any, do
not survive and are disposed of accordingly.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…