Bombay High Court

LAXMAN RAMU REME L.RS. HARIBAI LAXMAN YEME AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

The Court partially allowed the appeals, modifying the compensation to Rs 60,000 per acre, granting statutory benefits and interest, while leaving the other awards unchanged.

Summary

The appellants challenged the 2008 judgments and awards of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kandhar, concerning land acquired for the Upper Manar Project. They argued that the same controversy had already been decided in First Appeal No. 276 of 2013, and therefore the present appeals should be decided on that basis. The Court accepted that the issues were identical to the earlier decision and partially allowed the appeals. It modified the compensation to Rs 60,000 per acre for the acquired dry lands, affirmed entitlement to all statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and ordered interest under Sections 28 and 34 in line with the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari. The remaining awards were left unchanged and pending civil applications were disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the controversy in the present appeals is identical to that decided in First Appeal No. 276 of 2013 and thus bound by the earlier judgment.
Whether the compensation awarded for the acquired dry lands should be revised to Rs 60,000 per acre.
Whether the appellants are entitled to statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Whether interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is payable.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation
statutory benefits
interest
issue estoppel
appellate jurisdiction
Upper Manar Project

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:40627
924-FA-1253-2015.odt
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
924 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1253 OF 2015
Baburao Tukaram Shendge And Another
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1776 OF 2015
Madhav Limbaji Hake (Died)
Through L.Rs. Vimalbai Madhav Hake And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2350 OF 2013
Laxman Ramu Yeme (Died)
Through L.Rs. Haribai Laxman Yeme And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.2351 OF 2013
Raghunath S/o. Balaji Devkate (Died)
Through L.Rs. Chandrabhaga W/o. Raghunath Devkate And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
……
Mr. G.K. Sontakke, Advocate for Appellants-Claimants in all FAs
Mr. A.D. Wange, AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 in all FAs
Mr. S.W. Munde, Advocate for Respondent No.3-Acquiring Body in FA/1776/2015
……

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 29 AUGUST, 2026
PER COURT :

1. First Appeal Nos. 2350 of 2013 and 2351 of 2013 are not on board.

Upon mentioning, the same are taken on board.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
924-FA-1253-2015.odt
2

3. The present appeals arise out of the Judgments and Awards dated

18.04.2008 and 21.04.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior

Division, Kandhar, in Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 428 of 2003, 432 of

2003, 458 of 2003 and 457 of 2003.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants has tendered across the Bar a

copy of the judgment and order dated 13.08.2026 passed by this Court in

First Appeal No. 276 of 2013 and connected matters. He submits that the

lands of the appellants were acquired by different notifications from the

same village, i.e. Gaundgaon, for the same public purpose, namely, the

Upper Manar Project, as involved in the said appeals. It is, therefore,

contended that the controversy involved in the present appeals is squarely

covered by the order dated 13.08.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal

No. 276 of 2013 and connected matters and, consequently, the present

appeals deserve to be disposed of in terms thereof. The learned A.G.P.

appearing for the respondent-State and learned counsel Mr. Munde,

appearing for the acquiring body in First Appeal No. 1776 of 2015, fairly

concede the aforesaid position.

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 appeals is identical to the one decided

by this Court in First Appeal No. 276 of 2013 and connected matters by the

order dated 13.08.2026, I see no reason to take a different view.
924-FA-1253-2015.odt
3

The present appeals, therefore, deserve to be disposed of in terms of the said

judgment and order. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

(i) The First Appeals are partly allowed.

(ii) The impugned Judgments and Awards dated 18.04.2008 and
21.04.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kandhar, in
Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 428 of 2003, 432 of 2003, 458 of 2003 and
457 of 2003 are modified to the extent that the appellants-claimants shall be
entitled to receive compensation at the rate of Rs.60,000/- per Acre for their
acquired dry lands.

(iii) The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to all statutory benefits
under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(iv) The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to interest under Sections
28 and 34 of the Act, strictly in accordance with the Full Bench decision of
this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3)
Mh.L.J. 457.

(v) Rest of the Judgments and Awards passed by the learned Reference
Court shall remain unaltered.

(vi) The modified awards be drawn accordingly.

(vii) The appellants-claimants shall pay the deficit Court fees, if any, on
the enhanced compensation.

(viii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
S P Rane

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…