Bombay High Court

STATE OF MAHAversusRAGHUNATH SHEKHA BIRAJDAR DIED LRS

Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The reference court correctly enhanced the compensation and its order was not perverse.

Summary

The State of Maharashtra appealed three separate land acquisition awards where the Special Land Acquisition Officer had fixed compensation at Rs.13,000‑14,000 per hectare and the reference court enhanced it to Rs.33,000 per acre, also adding compensation for fruit‑bearing trees and a well. The appellants argued that the reference court had erred in both the figures for land and the additional items, claiming the original award figures were correct. The High Court examined the record and the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleaders. It held that the reference court had correctly exercised its discretion in enhancing the compensation and found no perversity in its order. Consequently, the Court dismissed all three first appeals and ordered that any pending civil applications be disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the reference court erred in enhancing the compensation rate for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act.
Whether the inclusion of compensation for fruit‑bearing trees and a well was proper.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 4

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation enhancement
reference court
High Court appeal
perversity

Judgment

                                                                  FA 2721/08
                                     1

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    3 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2721 OF 2008

                        STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                VERSUS
                     BANDU KASHINATH GAIKWAD
                                   ...
                AGP for Appellant/State : Mrs. A.S. Mantri
                                   ...
                  4 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2722 OF 2008

                        STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                 VERSUS
                RAGHUNATH SHEKHA BIRAJDAR DIED LRS
                                   ....
                 AGP for Appellant/State : Mr. S.S. Dande
                                    ...
                   6 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2724 OF 2008

                        STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                 VERSUS
                         BABURAO RUPA RATHOD
                                    ...
                AGP for Appellant/State : Mr. R.B. Dhaware
                                    ...
                   CORAM         : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                    Dated         : July 27, 2026

PER COURT :-

1.    As the acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 1988, heard

finally with the consent of learned AGPs in respective matters.

2.    The present appeals are preferred by the State, challenging the

judgment and award dated 28.4.1995 passed by the learned Civil Judge,

Senior Division, Osmanabad in LAR Nos. 213, 208 and 220 of 1993.

3.    In the present matters, the lands of the claimants were acquired for

Benetura Medium Project. Notification under section 4 of the Land

Acquisition Act was published on 21.4.1988. The Special Land Acquisition

Officer (SLAO) has published the award on 24.9.1992 and has granted
                                                                FA 2721/08
                                        2

compensation at the rate of Rs.13,000/- per H. to 14,000/- per H. and the

reference court has enhanced the same by granting rate of 33,000/- per

Acre and also granted compensation for fruit bearing trees and well etc.

Hence, the present appeals are filed.

4.     The learned AGPs in respective matters submit that there were

incorrect figures mentioned in the judgment and award, but while

preparing the award those number of trees were correct and thus, the

reference court has wrongly enhanced the rate for acquired lands as well

as for fruit bearing trees, well etc. They therefore prays to allow the

appeals.

5.     Having heard the learned AGPs and having gone through the record,

I find that the learned reference court has enhanced the amount of

compensation correctly. I do not find any perversity in the order passed by

the reference court. Hence, the first appeals are dismissed. Pending Civil

application, if any, also stands disposed of.



                                            ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )

ssc/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…