BALIRAM HARI PATIL L.RS. GULAB BALIRAM PATIL AND ORSversusTHE SPECIALLAND ACQ. OFFICFER AND ORS

2026:BHC-AUG:40850
              Dilwale                                      1                  902-FA-116-08.odt




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                   902 FIRST APPEAL NO. 116 OF 2008

              Bhagwan Lalji Patil L.rs. Nandlal Bhagwan L.rs. Kusumbai Nandlal Patil
                                              And Ors
                                              VERSUS
                                   State Of Maharashtra And Ors

                                                WITH
                                     FIRST APPEAL NO. 117 OF 2008

                        Baliram Hari Patil L.rs. Gulab Baliram Patil And Ors
                                              VERSUS
                              The Specialland Acq. Officfer And Ors
                                                  ...
             Advocate for Appellants : Mr. Vijay Bhalerao Patil
             AGP for Respondent-State: Mr. A. M. Phule
             Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. Pokharkar Darshan Dinkarrao
                                                  ...

                                      CORAM         : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                      DATE          : 01.09.2026

             PER COURT :
             1.         As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 1978, the appeals are

             being heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the

             respective parties.

             2.         By these appeals, the appellants-original claimants challenge the

             judgment and award dated 28.06.2007 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior

             Division, Jalgaon in LAR Nos.25 and 63 of 1990, to the extent it directs

             recovery of the amount already withdrawn by them.

             3.         The lands of the claimants were acquired for the purpose of Bahula
 Dilwale                                      2                  902-FA-116-08.odt


Medium Project. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition

Act, 1894 (in short, “the Act”) was published on 05.10.1978, declaration

under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 26.08.1981, Award under

Section 11 of the Act was passed on 22.09.1986. The SLAO granted

compensation @ Rs.13,000/- per H for irrigated land and the learned

Reference Court enhanced it to Rs.18,000/- per H for irrigated land and

Rs.9000/-per H for dry land, whereas the claimants have claimed

compensation @ Rs. 93,000/- per H.

4.         Mr. Patil, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

SLAO had awarded meagre compensation. Being dissatisfied with the

compensation so awarded, the claimants sought enhancement by filing

references. Initially, the references were allowed. The said decision was

challenged by the acquiring body by filing First Appeal No.37 of 1990

along with connected appeals. He further submits that by order dated

11th January 2005, this Court set aside the award passed by the learned

Reference Court in LAR Nos.24 of 1990, 25 of 1990, 26 of 1990 and 27 of

1990 and remanded the matters to the learned Reference Court for fresh

consideration. After remand, the claimants relied upon the same sale

instance at Exhibit 34 dated 22nd December 1977 pertaining to village

Khedgaon, a sale instance situated at a considerable distance from the

acquired lands. Upon reconsideration, the learned Reference Court did

not grant any further enhancement. Since, during the pendency of the

proceedings, the claimants had withdrawn the amount, the learned
 Dilwale                                     3                  902-FA-116-08.odt


Reference Court directed recovery of the amount already withdrawn by

them. He further submits that the present appeals are, therefore, confined

to the direction regarding recovery. The learned counsel for the

appellants fairly submits that the appellants are not seeking any

enhancement in the compensation awarded for the acquired lands and

are restricting their challenge to the direction of recovery issued by the

learned Reference Court.

5.         The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Hon’ ble

Supreme Court in the matter of Pundalik Bajirao Patil (D) by Lrs. v. State

of Maharashtra decided on 15.10.2012 set aside the order passed by this

Hon’ble Court and maintained the order passed by the learned Civil Court

in LAR No.15 of 1989 dated 30.04.1992. He further submits that in LAR

No.15 of 1989 the learned Civil Court has determined the compensation

@ Rs.50,000/- per H for jirayat land and Rs.75,000/- per H for Bagayat

land. The learned Civil Court had relied upon the sale instance at Exhibit

34 from the close vicinity of the acquired land in LAR No.15 of 1989.

6.         Per contra, learned AGP for the State submits that the learned

Reference Court has rightly declined to rely upon the sale instance at

Exhibit 34 dated 22.12.1977 produced by the claimants. The land

covered under the said sale instance was situated at considerable distance

from the acquired land. The learned Civil Court in LAR No.15/1989 has

erroneously relied upon Exhibit 34 as it was not from the close vicinity of

the acquired land. Therefore, he prays to dismiss the appeal.
 Dilwale                                      4                  902-FA-116-08.odt


7.         The learned counsel for the respondent no.3 has adopted the

submissions advanced by the learned AGP for the respondent-State.

8.         In LAR No.15 of 1989, the learned Civil Court had determined the

compensation @ Rs.50,000/- per H for jirayat land and Rs.75,000/- per

H for Bagayat land and had relied upon the same sale instances which

are relied upon in the present appeals. Since the order passed in LAR

No.15 of 1989 has already been maintained by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court, Mr. Patil has tendered a copy thereof on record.

9.         Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having

gone through the said order in LAR No.15 of 1989, it appears that the

learned Civil Court by relying upon the sale instance at Exhibit 34 had

determined the market value and enhanced the compensation. The said

LAR also pertains to the same project. Though the acquired lands are

situated in a different village, the learned Civil Court had relied upon the

sale instance at Exhibit 34 for determining the market value, and the said

determination has already been maintained by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court

10.        Moreover, the appellants have placed on record a copy of the order

passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.8486 of 2012 in

the matter of Pundalik Bajirao Patil (D) by Lrs. v. State of Maharashtra

decided on 15.10.2012. By the said order, the Hon'ble Supreme Court set

aside the order passed by this Court and maintained the order passed by

the learned Civil Court in LAR No.15 of 1989 dated 30th April 1992.
 Dilwale                                         5                  902-FA-116-08.odt


11.        Having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, and particularly the

fact that the claimants are not seeking any enhancement in the present

appeals and are challenging only the direction for recovery, I am of the

view that the impugned award, to the extent of directing recovery, cannot

be sustained. Hence, the following order:

                                     ORDER

      (i)      The appeals are partly allowed.

      (ii)     The direction issued by the learned Reference Court for

               recovery of the amount already withdrawn by the

               claimants, as contained in operative clause Nos.3 and 6 of

               the impugned award, is hereby set aside.

      (iii)    The rest of the impugned award shall remain unaltered.

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




                                             [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
                                                       JUDGE