Bombay High Court

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHERversusKUNDLIK GYANBA (DIED) CPS (1) AND ANOTHER

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Holding

The reference court’s enhancement of compensation to Rs 1,400 per rupee was not excessive, and the appeal is dismissed.

Summary

The State of Maharashtra appealed a judgment of the Ad‑hoc District Judge‑2, Ambajogai, which had enhanced compensation for land acquired for a percolation tank. The land, acquired under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894, was initially compensated at Rs 245 per rupee and the claimants sought enhancement under Section 18, resulting in a reference court award of Rs 1,400 per rupee based on comparable sale instances. The State contended that this enhanced amount was excessive. The High Court examined the reference court’s reliance on the sale instances and concluded that the market value determination was reasonable and not exorbitant. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal and disposed of any pending civil applications.

Issues considered

Whether the reference court’s enhancement of compensation to Rs 1,400 per rupee under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is excessive
Whether the State can set aside the reference court’s determination of market value for Jirayat land

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act — s. 11, 18, 4

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation enhancement
Section 18
Jirayat land
reference court
appeal dismissed

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:46543

                                                                             CA 9589/14
                                                  1

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               6 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9589 OF 2014
                                         IN FAST/17970/2014

                            THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                               VERSUS
                           KUNDLIK GYANBA (DIED) CPS (1) AND ANOTHER
                                                  ...
                            AGP for Applicants/State : Mr. S.N. Morampalle
                                                  ...
                                                WITH
                               CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9588 OF 2014
                                         IN FAST/17970/2014
                                                  …

                                 CORAM        : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                 Dated        : September 30, 2026

            PER COURT :-

            1.    In civil application filed for condonation of delay, heard the learned

            AGP for the State/appellant. For the averments made in the application, the

            application is allowed. Delay is condoned.

            2.    As the acquisition proceeding is initiated in the year 1996, heard

            finally with the consent of learned AGP for State. None appears for

            respondents.

            3.    By this appeal, the appellants/State assails the judgment and award

            dated 28.4.2009 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-2, Ambajogai in LAR

            No. 56/2004 whereby the learned reference court has enhanced the

            compensation amount determined by the SLAO.

            4.    The land of the claimants admeasuring 1 H. 47 R. land from Survey

            Nos. 51/5 and 384 situated at village Jirewadi was acquired for construction

            of percolation tank at village Jirewadi. Notification under section 4 of the

            Land Acquisition Act came to be published on 21.3.1996. The award under
                                                                 CA 9589/14
                                      2

section 11 of the Act came to be published on 20.3.1999. The learned

Special Land Acquisition officer has awarded compensation at the rate of

Rs.245/- per R. The claimants after accepting the amount under protest,

filed reference under section 18 of the Act for enhancement. Before the

reference court, the claimants relied upon the sale instances, Exh. 17 to 19.

After considering the sale instances, the learned reference court enhanced

compensation at the rate of Rs.1400/- per R. for Jirayat land.

5.     Having heard the learned AGP, with his assistance, I have gone

through the record and proceedings and the impugned judgment and award

of the reference court. On perusal of the same, it appears that the reference

court has relied upon the sale instances, Exhs. 17 to 19 and recorded

finding that as per the sale instances rate comes to Rs. 3600/-, Rs. 5406/-

and Rs.3846/- and those are to be considered as comparable sale instances

and as the acquired land is Jirayat land, the learned reference court has

determined the market value of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 1400/-

per R. Therefore, this court is of the view that the reference court has not

granted any exorbitant or excessive compensation. Hence, no case is made

out by the State for interference. The present appeal is devoid of merits and

therefore, the same is dismissed. Pending civil applications, if any, stand

disposed of.



                                          ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )

ssc/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…