Bombay High Court
HANMANT RAJARAM BANBAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
- Bench
- SHAILESH P BRAHME
Holding
The court held that the Reference Court erred by not accepting the private valuer's report in entirety and allowed the appeal partially, awarding the full valuation amount.
Summary
The appellant challenged a 2019 award that enhanced compensation for a house acquired for the Lendi project only by 40% of the private valuer's assessment. The private valuer’s report valued the property at Rs. 2,76,356, but the Reference Court had granted only Rs. 34,930 in addition to the original award. No contrary evidence was presented by the acquiring authority. Relying on prior decisions of this Court, the judge held that the Reference Court erred by not accepting the valuer’s report in full. The appeal was partly allowed, directing that the appellant receive the full valuation amount plus interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, while the rest of the original award remains unchanged.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation award can be enhanced by fully accepting a private valuer's report.
- Whether the Reference Court committed patent illegality by limiting the enhancement to 40% of the valuer's assessment.
- Whether interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act is payable on the enhanced compensation.
- Whether the appeal should be allowed partially or dismissed.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act — s. 11, 28, 34, 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- private valuer report
- parity principle
- interest under Land Acquisition Act
- court fees
- partial appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:6697
1 fa 1453.25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1453 OF 2025
Hanmant Rajaram Banbare .. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Ms. Laxmi R. Thakur, Advocate h/f Shri Laxmikant C. Patil,
Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri S. N. Morampalle, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Shri Vinayak P. Narwade, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.
CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 12TH FEBRUARY, 2026.
FINAL ORDER :
. Appellant is questioning judgment and award dated
30.05.2019 passed by the Reference Court in L. A. R. No. 419 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
2 fa 1453.25
granted by the Reference Court.
4. The acquisition of the house property is for Lendi project
and the property is from village Itgyal, Tq. Mukhed, Dist.
Nanded. The notification under Section 4 was issued on
03.05.2007 and award under Section 11 was passed on
27.08.2010.
5. Following are the material particulars:
L.A.R. No. & First House No. Compen. Compen. Valuation and
Date of Appeal No. & Area granted by enhanced by Exhibit No. of
Decision acquired S.L.A.O. the Reference valuation
Court. report.
419/2012 1453/2025 Old H. No. 238 Rs. 87,350/- Rs. 34,930/- Rs. 2,76,356/-
30.05.2019 & 260 Exh. No. 24
New H. No.
157 & 163
109.05 Sq.
Mtrs
6. Appellant has adduced evidence of private valuer and his
report is proved and marked as Exhibit 24. The valuation is
shown to be of Rs. 2,76,356/-. 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.
7. 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.
3 fa 1453.25
(ii) Ramesh s/o Govindrao Patil Vs. State of
Maharashtra, in First Appeal No. 1814/2023, decided
on 18.12.2025.
8. 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.
B. The appellant is entitled to compensation of Rs. 2,76,356/-
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 reported in [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.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]
bsb/Feb. 26
Checking your session…