The Executive Engineer minor irrigation, Minor Irrigation Division 1 Aurangabad and OrsversusRamrao Maroti Gaikwad

2026:BHC-AUG:38408


                                                 1                          973...odt


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2 OF 2026

                   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, MINOR
                      IRRIGATION DIVISION 1 AURANGABAD AND ORS
                                            VERSUS
                                 RAMRAO MAROTI GAIKWAD
                                                ...
                        Advocate for Appellants : Mr. Sarita Vivek Gaikwad
                           Advocate for Respondent : Mr. R.V. Gunale
                            h/f. Mr. Gunale Vishwambar Digamberrao
                                                …

                                      CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.

                                      DATE       : 20th AUGUST, 2026

              PER COURT :

              1.          This Appeal is filed by the acquiring body challenging the

              impugned judgment and award to the extent of interest under Section 28

              of on the enhanced compensation from the date of delivery of possession

              by the judgment and award dated 18.03.2023, passed by the 6 th Joint

              Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad, in LAR no. 163/2017.


              2.          Learned Advocate for the Appellants submits that the land of

              the Respondent situated at Village Reolgaon, Taluka Kannad, District

              Aurangabad, in Gat no. 98 admeasuring 35 R was acquired for the

              purpose of construction of Neopur Medium Project. The award was

              passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 15/21 June, 1996.
                                     2                        973...odt


3.           Being dissatisfied with the amount awarded by the Land

Acquisition Officer, the Claimants filed the reference Petition in the year

2017. The Reference Court decided the reference vide judgment and

order dated 18.03.2023, in LAR no. 163/2017. In the said reference, the

Reference Court has awarded interest on the enhanced amount at the rate

of 9% per annum from the date of delivery of possession as per award at

Exhibit 25 for the period of first one year and, thereafter, at the rate of

15% per annum for subsequent years till its realization as per Section 28

of the Land Acquisition Act. Similarly, challenge is also raised to the

interest on the original compensation amount awarded by the Competent

Authority as per Section 24 of the Land Acquisition Act ( for short ‘the

Act’).


4.           According to the learned Advocate, clause nos. 5 and 6 of

the judgment of the Reference Court dated 18.03.2023 are contrary to the

judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra Versus Kailash Shiva

Rangari, AIR 2016 Bombay 141. This judgment laus down that if the

possession of the land is taken under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition

Act, the interest under Section 34 would be payable from the date of

possession and not from date of the award. However, if possession is

taken prior to the issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the
                                     3                        973...odt


Act, there is no question of invoking the urgency clauses under Section

17, and the interest under Section 34 shall start running from the date of

passing of the award. Similarly, observations have been made that for the

purpose of calculating the amount of the additional component under

Section 23(1-A) of the Act, at the rate of 12% per annum, the starting

point is the date of award or date publication of the notification under

Section 4 of the Act, and the terminal point is the date of taking

possession, whichever is relevant. Thus taking into consideration and

eventualities, the Claimant shall be entitled to interest under Section 34

of the said Act, from the date of publication of notification under Section

4 (1) of the said Act.


5.           It is, therefore, held that if the possession is taken before

notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, and / or

before the award is passed, the land owner would be entitled for interest

as per Section 34 of the Act, necessarily from the date of passing of the

award under Section 11 of the said Act.


6.           It is, therefore, contention of the learned Advocate for the

Appellant that in view of the decision in case of Kailash Shiva Rangari

(supra), the order passed by the Reference Court needs to be modified.

The learned Advocate further relies on the judgment of this Court where
                                     4                        973...odt


similar situation has arisen and the First Appeal no. 5135/2017, filed by

the State of Maharashtra, was allowed only to the extent of interest

awarded by the Reference Court by modifying the award as per the

reference in the case of Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra).


7.           Learned Advocate appearing for the Claimant also does not

dispute the said position and would submit that on disposal of the present

Appeal, the Claimant may be allowed to withdraw the amount deposited

by the acquiring body.


8.           Hence, in view of the aforementioned legal position as it

emerges from the Full Bench decision in the case of Kailash Shiva

Rangari (supra), the Land Acquisition Reference no. 163/2017 is

modified and it is directed to be calculated that so far as interest in the

present matter is concerned, is directed from the date of award instead of

date of taking the possession, to bring the order under reference in tune

with the decision of the Full Bench of this Court, clause numbers 5 and 6

of the reference are modified. Accordingly, the interest under Sections 28

and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act shall be payable from the date of the

award, and not from the date of possession as erroneously observed by

the Reference Court.
                                    5                        973...odt


9.          As a result of the aforementioned directions, the Appeal is

partly allowed only to the extent of interest payable to the Claimants.

Rest of the judgment passed by the Reference Court shall remain as it is.


10.         The Respondent / Claimant is allowed to withdraw the

amount along with the interest accrued thereon, which is deposited in this

Court.




                                    ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )




SPC