Bombay High Court

BALAJI MAROTI BANBAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Bench: SHAILESH P BRAHME

Holding

The appeal is partly allowed and the appellant is awarded the full compensation of Rs.2,52,630 as per the private valuer’s report.

Summary

The appellant, Balaji Maroti Banbare, challenged the award dated 13 June 2019 of the Reference Court in L.A.R. No. 225/2012, seeking full compensation for his house property acquired for the Lendi project. The Reference Court had granted only a 40% enhancement over the basic award, rejecting the private valuer’s report that valued the property at Rs.2,52,630. The appellant argued that the High Court consistently accepts private valuer reports for compensation enhancement, while the respondents contended that the award was adequate. Relying on earlier decisions of the same court, the judge held that the Reference Court committed a patent illegality by not accepting the valuer’s report in entirety. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed, the appellant was awarded the full Rs.2,52,630, interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, and the record was sent back to the Reference Court for drawing up the award.

Issues considered

Whether the Reference Court erred in refusing to accept the private valuer’s report for full compensation under the Land Acquisition Act.
Whether a 40% enhancement is sufficient or the full valuation should be awarded.
Whether interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act is payable on the enhanced compensation.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act — s. 11, 28, 34, 4

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation enhancement
private valuer report
interest under Land Acquisition Act
patent illegality
Section 4
Section 11
Section 28
Section 34

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:6751

1 55 FA 1368 25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT
AURANGABAD

55 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1368 OF 2025

BALAJI MAROTI BANBARE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
...
Advocate for Appellant : Ms. L.R. Thakur h/f Mr. Patil Laxmikant C.
AGP for Respondent no. 1 & 2 : Mr. N. D. Raje
Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr. V.P. Narwade
…

CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 12.02.2026.

FINAL ORDER :

. Appellant is questioning judgment and award dated
13.06.2019 passed by the Reference Court in L. A. R. No. 225 of
2012 and seeking enhancement of compensation on the ground of
parity.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that
this Court has been taking consistent view in case of acquisition of
house property to accept private valuer’s report for awarding the
compensation. The Reference Court only granted enhancement to
the extent of 40% instead of accepting the valuer’s report.

3. The submissions of the appellant are contested by the
respondents. It is submitted that no case is made out for
enhancement and adequate compensation has already been granted
by the Reference Court.

4. The acquisition of the house property is for Lendi project and
2 55 FA 1368 25

the property is from village Itgyal, Tq. Mukhed, Dist. Nanded. The
notification under Section 4 was issued on 03.05.2007 and award
was passed under Section 11 on 27.08.2010. Following are the
material particulars.

L.A.R. NO. First Appeal House no. and L.A.O. Reference Valuation and
& date of no. area granted Court granted Exh. no. of
decision compensati enhancement valuation
on report
225/2012 1368/2025 Old H. No. 307 Rs. 40% Rs. 2,52,630/-
13.06.2019 new H.No. 204 77,399/- Rs. 30,960/- Exh. 26.
40 square meter

5. Appellant has adduced evidence of private valuer at Exhibit
26. The valuation is shown to be of Rs.2,52,630/-. There is no
contra evidence adduced by the respondent – acquiring body. This
Court has been taking consistent view in accepting the report of the
private valuer for enhancing the compensation. A useful reliance can
be had to following judgments of the of this Court:
(i) Kashinath s/o Nagnth Vs. State of
Maharashtra in First Appeal No. 2460/2021,
decided on 13.07.2022.
(ii) Ramesh s/o Govindrao Patil Vs. State of
Maharashtra, in First Appeal No. 1814/2023,
decided on 18.12.2025.

6. The Reference Court has committed patent illegality in
awarding the compensation marginally instead of accepting the
report of private valuer in entirety. I, therefore, pass following order.

ORDER
A. The first appeal is allowed partly.
3 55 FA 1368 25

B. The appellant is entitled to compensation of
Rs. 2,52,630/- for the acquired house property.

C. The appellant shall be entitled to receive interest
U/Sec. 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act in view of the
judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the matter of
State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari [2016 AIR
(Bom.)141].

D. Save and except above, the impugned judgment and
award shall remain unaltered.

E. The appellant shall pay the deficit court fees.

F. Award be drawn up accordingly.

G. Record and proceedings shall be sent back to the
Reference Court.

( SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. )

mkd/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…