Bombay High Court
VASANT TULSIRAM CHAVHAN DIED L.RS. SHIVAJI VASANT CHAVHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, JALGAON AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The appeal is partly allowed, modifying the awards to enhanced compensation rates, granting interest under Sections 28 and 34, and denying interest for delay.
Summary
The appellants challenged the judgments and awards of the Joint Civil Judge in two land acquisition references concerning land taken for the Waghur Project. They sought enhanced compensation rates for Bagayat, Jirayat and Potkharab lands and a higher valuation for fruit‑bearing trees, as well as interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The respondents (the State and the acquiring authority) conceded that the matter was identical to earlier decisions of the Coordinate Bench, which had fixed Rs 4,00,000 per hectare for Bagayat land and allowed 80% of the tree valuation. The Court, agreeing with the parties, partly allowed the appeals, modifying the awards to the enhanced rates, granting interest under Sections 28 and 34 in line with State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari, but denying interest for any delay. The Court also ordered payment of any deficit court fees on the enhanced compensation and disposed of pending civil applications.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate rate of compensation for Bagayat, Jirayat and Potkharab lands under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
- Whether compensation for fruit‑bearing trees should be fixed at 80% of the valuation report?
- Whether interest is payable under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
- Whether claimants are entitled to interest for the period of delay in payment?
- Whether deficit court fees are payable on the enhanced compensation?
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation rates
- Bagayat land
- Jirayat land
- Potkharab land
- fruit‑bearing trees valuation
- interest under Land Acquisition Act
- court fees
- judicial precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:45709
71-FA-1323-2017.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
71 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1323 OF 2017
Vasant Tulsiram Chavhan (Died)
Through L.Rs. Shivaji Vasant Chavhan And Others
VERSUS
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon And Another
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1322 OF 2017
Bhagwat Tulsiram Chavhan
VERSUS
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jalgaon And Another
……
Mr. A.B. Kale, Advocate for Appellants
Mr. A.M. Phule, AGP for Respondent No.1-State
Mr. V.V. Tarde, Advocate for Respondent No.2-Acquiring Body
……
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 28 SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. These appeals arise out of the impugned Judgments and Awards
dated 20.01.2010 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division,
Jalgaon, in Land Acquisition References No.839 of 2005 (Old LAR No.432
OF 2004) and 832 of 2005 (Old LAR No.440 OF 2004).
3. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a
copy of the order dated 02.12.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this
Court in First Appeal No.1328 of 2007 and connected matters, wherein the
71-FA-1323-2017.odt
2
Coordinate Bench of this Court relied upon the order passed in First Appeal
No. 2076 of 2023 dated 04.12.2013, by which the rate of Bagayat land is
considered and accepted at Rs.4,00,000/- per Hectare and considered the
compensation to the extent of 80% of the amount of the valuation report for
the trees. He submits that the land of the appellants was acquired from the
village Chinchkheda, Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon for the same project
i.e. Waghur Project, as involved in the said appeal. It is, therefore,
contended that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely
covered by the said orders, and consequently, the present appeal deserves to
be disposed of in terms thereof.
4. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 fairly
concede the aforesaid position. Learned counsel as well as the
learnedappearing for the acquiring body also consented for passing the same
order in the present matterrs.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel
for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the
controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by
the Coordinate Bench in the aforementioned matters, I see no reason to take
a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in
terms of the said judgment and order. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The First Appeals are partly allowed.
71-FA-1323-2017.odt
3
(ii) The impugned Judgments and Awards passed by the learned Joint
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon, in the above-referred Land Acquisition
References are modified to the following extent.
(iii) The Claimants are entitled to receive the enhanced amount of
compensation at the rate of Rs.4,00,000/- per hectare for acquired bagayat
lands, Rs.2,00,000/- for jirayat lands and Rs.1,00,000/- for potkharab lands,
according to the categorization of the acquired lands made by the learned
Reference Court.
(iv) The appellants-claimants shall be entitled for the compensation
towards fruit bearing trees @ 80% of the amount determined in the
valuation report.
(v) The claimants shall be entitled to consequential statutory benefits on
the enhanced compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894.
(vi) The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to interest under Sections
28 and 34 of the Act, strictly in accordance with the Full Bench decision in
State of Maharashtra vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457.
(vii) The claimants shall pay deficit court fees, if any, on the enhanced
compensation.
(viii) The Claimants shall not be entitled for the interest for the delayed
period, if any.
(ix) Modified awards be drawn accordingly.
(x) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
S P Rane
Checking your session…