Bombay High Court

STATE OF MAHAversusJAIPRAKASH WAMANRAO SALGARE

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

The Court dismissed the State's appeal and partly allowed the claimant's cross‑objections, granting compensation at Rs 40,000 per acre and statutory benefits, but denying interest for the delayed period.

Summary

The State of Maharashtra appealed a 2002 judgment and award concerning land acquisition for the Terna Medium Project, seeking to overturn the compensation awarded. The High Court noted that it had already, in First Appeal No.550 of 1993, enhanced compensation for the same project to Rs 40,000 per acre, rendering the State's appeal untenable. Consequently, the Court dismissed the State's appeal. The claimant’s cross‑objections were partially allowed, granting the same Rs 40,000 per acre compensation and statutory benefits, including interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as per a 2016 Full Bench decision. However, the claimant was barred from claiming interest for the period of delay and was ordered to pay the deficit court fees. All pending civil applications were disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the State's first appeal challenging the 2002 judgment should be dismissed in view of the earlier compensation enhancement order.
Whether the claimant's cross‑objections are maintainable and entitled to the benefit of the earlier compensation order.
Whether the claimant is entitled to statutory benefits and interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the extent of such entitlement.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation enhancement
first appeal
cross‑objections
statutory benefits
interest
court fees

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:45710
69-FA-2003-2010.odt
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

69 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2003 OF 2010

State Of Maharashtra
VERSUS
Jaiprakash Wamanrao Salgare

AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8491 OF 2026 IN X-OBJST/23686/2026

Jaiprakash Wamanrao Salgare.
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Collector, Osmanabad.

……
Mr. D.R. Korde, AGP for Appellant-State
Mr. S.B. Choudhari, Advocate for Applicant-Claimant
……

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 28 SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8491 OF 2026:

1. The present application is filed for condonation of delay of 5590

days caused in filing the Cross-Objections.

2. For the reasons stated in the respective applications, the Civil

Applications deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the delay caused in filing

the Cross-Objections is condoned, subject to the condition that the claimant

shall not be entitled to statutory benefits for the period of delay. The Civil

Applications stand disposed of.
69-FA-2003-2010.odt
2

ORDER IN FIRST APPEAL AND CROSS-OBJECTIONS (ST):

3. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

4. The present First Appeal and Cross-Objections arise out of the

Judgment and Award dated 14.06.2002 passed by the learned Joint Civil

Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in Land Acquisition Reference No.449

of 1991.

5. This Court, in First Appeal No.550 of 1993 and the connected matter,

has already enhanced the compensation and granted the rate of Rs.40,000/-

per Acre for the acquired irrigated land. In view of the said order, the First

Appeal filed by the State does not survive. Once this Court has already

enhanced the compensation in respect of the same project, no case is made

out for interference with the Judgment and Award passed by the learned

Reference Court. The First Appeal filed by the State, therefore, deserves to

be dismissed.

6. As regards the Cross-Objections filed by the applicant-claimant, the

same deserve to be partly allowed in view of the order dated 05.08.2026

passed in First Appeal No.550 of 1993. The land of the appellant therein

was acquired from the same village, namely, Makni, for the same public

purpose, i.e. Terna Medium Project, as involved in the present matter,

though under a different notification. Therefore, the controversy involved in

the present Cross-Objections is squarely covered by the said order.
69-FA-2003-2010.odt
3

Consequently, the applicant-claimant is also entitled to the benefit of the

said order. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

(i) The First Appeal filed by the State is dismissed.

(ii) The Cross-Objections filed by the applicant-claimant are partly

allowed in terms of the order dated 05.08.2026 passed in First Appeal

No.550 of 1993.

(iii) The Claimant is entitled to receive compensation at the rate of
Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) per acre for the acquired
irrigated land and to that extent impugned award stands modified.

(iii) The Claimant shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits, including
interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in
accordance with the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in , 2016
(3) 457.

(iv) The claimant shall pay the deficit court fees.

(v) The Claimants shall not be entitled for the interest for the delayed
period, if any.

(vi) Rest of the impugned award stands confirmed.

(vii) Award be drawn accordingly.

(viii) Pending civil applications, if any, are also disposed of.

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
S P Rane

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…