Bombay High Court

VITTHAL DHONDIBA RATHODversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR JALNA AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SHAILESH P BRAHME

Holding

The Court held that the appellants are entitled to Rs 4,619 per R for dry land and Rs 6,929 per R for semi‑irrigated land, with interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, but no further statutory benefits.

Summary

The appellants, whose lands in Belora village were acquired for a percolation tank, challenged the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs 1,700 per R) and the subsequent enhancement by the Reference Court (Rs 2,200 for dry land and Rs 3,300 for semi‑irrigated land). They sought further enhancement on the basis of parity with a prior judgment (First Appeal No. 3304 of 2025) that fixed higher rates, and invoked Supreme Court precedents requiring a 10% per‑annum escalation. The State opposed the claim, arguing that the lands were not comparable and that parity could not be applied. The Court examined the earlier precedent, applied the 10% annual escalation for one year (since the acquisition notification was issued in 2009 versus 2008 in the earlier case), and held that the appellants were entitled to Rs 4,619 per R for dry land and Rs 6,929 per R for semi‑irrigated land. The Court also granted interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act but denied other statutory benefits, and modified the award accordingly.

Issues considered

Whether the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation rates on the ground of parity with a prior judgment
Whether a 10% per‑annum escalation under Supreme Court precedent applies to the compensation awarded
Whether interest and other statutory benefits are payable on the enhanced compensation

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34, 4

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation enhancement
parity principle
interest
escalation
dry land
semi‑irrigated land
percolation tank

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:18245

1 43 & 44 fa 619.25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

43 FIRST APPEAL NO. 619 OF 2025

Babusing Dhondiba Rathod .. Appellant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents

Shri Shubham M. Kakde, Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri C. V. Bhadane, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
The Respondent No. 3 is served.

AND
43 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1305 OF 2025

Vitthal Dhondiba Rathod .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents

WITH
43 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1306 OF 2025

Devidas Dhondiba Rathod .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents

WITH
43 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1307 OF 2025

Manohar Chandu Chavhan .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents
2 43 & 44 fa 619.25

WITH
43 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1308 OF 2025

Namdeo Gabbu Chavhan .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents

Shri Shubham M. Kakde, Advocate for the Appellant in all above
matters.
Shri G. O. Wattamwar, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
in all above matters.
The Respondent No. 3 is served.

AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1287 OF 2025

Ajit Chandu Chavan .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents

Shri Shubham M. Kakde, Advocate for the Appellant.
Smt. P. V. Diggikar, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
The Respondent No. 3 is served.

AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1183 OF 2026

Rajesh Chandu Chavan .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through the
Collector Jalna and others .. Respondents

Shri Shubham M. Kakde, Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri S. V. Hange, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
The Respondent No. 3 is served.
3 43 & 44 fa 619.25

CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 23RD APRIL, 2026.

FINAL ORDER :

. First Appeal No. 1287 of 2025 and First Appeal No. 1183 of
2026 are not on board. On mentioning by the learned counsel for
the appellants, same are taken on board.

2. Heard both sides. Taken up for final disposal with the
consent of the parties.

3. Appellants are aggrieved by the distinct judgments and
awards passed by the Reference Court in various land references
awarding very inadequate compensation. The enhancement is
sought on the ground of parity and especially referring to the
order dated 08.04.2026 passed in First Appeal No. 3304 of 2025
passed by this Court. The enhancement is founded on rate of Rs.
4,199/- per R for dry land, Rs. 6,299/- per R for seasonally
irrigated land and Rs. 8,398/- per R for irrigated land awarded in
the above referred first appeal.

4. First Appeals are contested by the respondents on various
grounds. It is submitted that no case is made out for further
enhancement. There is no similarity of the lands. The ground of
parity cannot be pressed into service. The appeals are liable to
be dismissed.
4 43 & 44 fa 619.25

5. Following are the relevant details.

F.A. No. LAR No. Gut Total Notificatio Award u/s. SLAO Ld. Type of land Ld.
No. Acqu n u/s.4 11 date rate as Reference Reference Court
ired per award Court awarded
area enhanced
rate per R
Jir Se Irr Po
aya mi ig t
t irri at kh
gat ed ar
ed ab
619/2025 420/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 2200/- 00
61R per R dry per R for H
dry 61
R
1305/2025 421/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 3300/- OH
60R per R dry per R for 60
semi R
irrigated
1308/2025 413/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 2200/- 0H
39R per R dry per R for 39
dry R
1307/2025 493/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 2200/- 0H
51R per R dry per R for 51
dry R
1306/2025 412/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 3300/- 0H
90R per R dry per R for 90
semi R
irrigated
1287/2025 414/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 3300/- 0H
51R per R dry per R for 51
semi R
irrigated
1183/2026 417/2011 92 00H 06.01.2009 30.11.2010 Rs. 1700/- Rs. 3300/- 0H
50R per R dry per R for 50
semi R
irrigated

6. The lands of the appellants from village Belora (Tanda),
Tq. Mantha, Dist. Jalna stood acquired for percolation tank No.
04. The notification U/Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was
issued on 06.01.2009. The rate awarded by the Special Land
Acquisition Officer is Rs. 1,700/- per R considering the lands as
dry lands. Reference Court enhanced the rate at Rs. 2,200/- per
R for dry land and Rs. 3,300/- per R for semi irrigated land by
classifying the lands. The classification of lands is not in dispute
5 43 & 44 fa 619.25

in the present appeals.

7. This Court had an occasion to deal with similar type of
acquisition from self same village in First Appeal No. 3304 of
2025. Vide order dated 08.04.2026, considering the rate fixed in
L. A. R. No. 334 of 2014, this Court fixed the rate at Rs. 4,199/-
per R for dry land and Rs. 6,299/- per R for semi irrigated land
enhanced the compensation. I have gone through the order
placed on record. The appeals are squarely covered by the view
taken by this Court. Appellants are entitled to the rate at Rs.
4,199/- per R for dry land, Rs. 6,299/- per R for seasonally
irrigated land and Rs. 8,398/- per R for irrigated land.

8. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the
matters of Huchangouda Vs. Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition
Officer reported in (2020)19 SCC 236 and Ali Mohammad Beigh and others
Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir reported in (2017) 4 SCC 717, they are
entitled to escalation at 10% per annum. In First Appeal No.
3304 of 2025, notification U/Sec. 4 of the L. A. Act was issued on
14.01.2008. Notification U/Sec. 4 of the L. A. Act in the present
matter is issued on 06.01.2009. In that view of the matter, they
are entitled to have escalation for one year with cumulative
effect. The rate works out to be Rs. 4,619/- per R for dry land and
Rs. 6,929/- per R for semi irrigated land.

9. I, therefore, pass following order.
6 43 & 44 fa 619.25

ORDER

a. The appellants shall be entitled to receive Rs. 4,619/- per R
for dry land and Rs. 6,929/- per R for semi irrigated land,
considering the nature of their lands classified by the Reference
Court.

b. The appellants shall not be entitled to the interest and
statutory benefits for the delayed period.

c. The appellants shall be entitled to receive the interest
under Section 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as per
Full Bench judgment of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari
reported in [2016 AIR (Bom.)141].

d. Save and except above modification, the impugned
judgment and award shall stand unaltered.

e. Record and proceeding be sent back to the Reference Court,
if any.

f. The appellants shall pay deficit court fees, if any.

g. Award be drawn accordingly.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]

bsb/April 26

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…