Bombay High Court
KAUSARALI SHAUKATALIversusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (2) UPPER TAPI PROJECT, HATNUR, JALGAON AND ANR
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The Court held that compensation must be awarded at Rs.2,00,000 per hectare for jirayat land, Rs.3,00,000 for semi‑irrigated land, Rs.4,00,000 for bagayat land, and Rs.1,00,000 for potkharab land, as per the earlier precedent.
Summary
The appellants, Kausarali Shaukatali and Gopal Anand Chaudhari, appealed the compensation awards granted by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in two land acquisition suits concerning the Upper Tapi Project. They argued that the rates of compensation should follow the earlier decision of this Court in Special Land Acquisition Officer (III) v. Bhagwat Vitthal Sonwane, which fixed higher market values for jirayat, bagayat, and potkharab lands. The State and the acquiring authority conceded this position. The Court examined the classification of the acquired lands (jirayat, semi‑irrigated, bagayat, potkharab) and applied the rates from the precedent: Rs.2,00,000 per hectare for jirayat, Rs.3,00,000 for semi‑irrigated, Rs.4,00,000 for bagayat, and Rs.1,00,000 for potkharab. It also ordered interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and all consequential statutory benefits. Consequently, the appeals were partly allowed and the earlier judgments were modified to reflect the revised compensation rates.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation rates fixed in Special Land Acquisition Officer (III) v. Bhagwat Vitthal Sonwane are applicable to the present land acquisition cases.
- How the acquired land should be classified for compensation purposes (jirayat, semi‑irrigated, bagayat, potkharab).
- Whether the claimants are entitled to interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether the appellate court can modify the earlier awards to align with the precedent.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 34
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation rates
- jirayat land
- bagayat land
- potkharab land
- semi‑irrigated land
- Section 34
- interest
- statutory benefits
- appellate modification
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41942
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
21 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1295 OF 2017
KAUSARALI SHAUKATALI
VERSUS
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (2) UPPER TAPI PROJECT,
HATNUR, JALGAON AND ANR
...
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1329 OF 2017
GOPAL ANAND CHAUDHARI
VERSUS
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER- UPPER TAPI PROJECT, HUTNUR-
I JALGAON AND ANOTHER
…
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Kale Ajeet B.
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Dande
Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. V.V. Tarde
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : September 07, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Ajeet B. Kale for the appellant, Mr. S.S.
Dande, learned AGP for State and Mr. V.V. Tarde, learned counsel for
acquiring body.
2. By these appeals, the appellants-original claimants challenge the
judgment and award dated 24.09.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge,
Senior Division, Jalgaon in LAR Nos. 2007/2005 and judgments and award
dated 16.11.2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division,
Jalgaon in LAR No. 123/2006.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has placed on record a copy of
the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Land
Acquisition Officer (III), Jalgaon and another vs. Bhagwat Vitthal Sonwane,
reported in 2009 (4) Mh.L.J. 308 arising out of the same project. He
submits that, in the said case, this Court determined the market value of
the acquired jirayat land at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- per hectare, bagayat
land at twice the rate of jirayat land, i.e. Rs.4,00,000/- per hectare, and
potkharab land at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per hectare. In the present
case, the learned Reference Court has determined the market value of the
acquired jirayat land at the rate of Rs.1,95,000/- per hectare in LAR No.
2007/2005 and Rs. 2,50,000/- per hectare for Bagayat land in LAR No.
123/2006. He, therefore, submits that the rates of compensation
determined in the aforesaid judgment may be applied to the acquired lands
in the present case.
4. Learned AGP appearing for the respondent-State, concedes the
aforesaid position.
5. The learned reference court has already treated acquired land from
Gat No. 73 as Bagayat land in LAR No. 123/2006. As far as land bearing Gat
No. 104/3 involved in LAR No. 2007/2005 is concerned, the learned
reference court has treated the acquired land as jirayat land and as far as
fruit bearing trees are concerned, though there was well in existence,
compensation was paid by the SLAO towards well. Therefore, the land
acquired from Gat No. 104/3 needs to be treated as seasonal irrigated land
and as per the judgment referred above, compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- per
H. needs to be granted for the acquired land from Gat No. 104/3.
6. In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench, the
appellants would be entitled to compensation at the rates determined
therein. The First Appeals, therefore, deserve to be partly allowed and the
impugned judgments and awards deserve to be modified to that extent.
Hence, the following order:
ORDER
I. The First Appeals are partly allowed.
II. The judgment and award dated 24.09.2009 passed by the learned
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in LAR Nos. 2007/2005 and judgments
and award dated 16.11.2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Jalgaon in LAR No. 123/2006 is modified to the extent indicated
hereinbelow.
III. The claimants shall be entitled to compensation for the acquired
land at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- per hectare for jirayat land, Rs. 3,00,000/-
per hectare for semi-irrigated land, Rs.4,00,000/- per hectare for bagayat
land and Rs.1,00,000/- per hectare for potkharab land.
IV. The claimant shall be entitled to all consequential statutory benefits
on the enhanced amount of compensation, in accordance with the
provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
V. The claimant shall be entitled to interest under Section 34 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, strictly in accordance with the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari.
VI. Save and except the aforesaid modification, the Judgment and
Award passed by the learned Reference Court shall remain unaltered.
VII. The appellant shall pay the deficit Court-fees, if any.
VIII. The modified award be drawn accordingly.
IX. Pending civil applications, if any, stand disposed of.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…