THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR JALNA AND ORSversusMOTIRAM DAGADU GAWANDE DIED THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS GAJANAN GAWANDE AND ORS

2026:BHC-AUG:33130
                                                    -1-
                                                                              976-FA-2747-2024

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                   FIRST APPEAL NO.2747 OF 2024

                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR JALNA
                                     AND OTHERS
                                        Versus
                    MOTIRAM S/O DAGADU GAWANDE, DIED THROUGH L.R'S
                       GAJANAN S/O MOTIRAM GAWANDE AND OTHERS

                                                 ......
              AGP for Appellant : Mr. K. S. Hoke Patil
              Advocate for Respondents : Mr. D. M. Pingale
                                                ...…
                                               CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                               DATED : 31st JULY, 2026
              PER COURT :

              1.          The     appellant-State      Government     takes    exception    to

              judgment and award dated 12.05.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge,

              Senior Division, Jalna / Reference Court in L.A.R. No. 40 of 2018.



              2.          The     appellants    have      acquired   agricultural    land   of

              respondents for the purpose of construction of percolation tank – 2 in File

              No. JA.KRA-06/LAQ/GA/CR-36/2003. The notification under Section

              4(1) of Land Acquisition Act was issued on 05.05.2005. The Land

              Acquisition Officer passed an award dated 20.05.2006 under Section 11

              of Land Acquisition Act and offered compensation for the acquired land

              @ Rs.665/- per R.
                                    -2-
                                                           976-FA-2747-2024

3.            The respondents made Reference under Section 18 of Land

Acquisition Act seeking enhanced compensation. The Reference Court, on

evaluation of evidence, determined compensation @ Rs. 14,688/- per R

for semi-irrigated land and Rs. 9,792/- per R for dry land. Accordingly,

impugned award has been passed by Reference Court along with interest

and statutory benefits as per Land Acquisition Act.



4.            Aggrieved by judgment and award passed by Reference

Court, State has filed present appeal.



5.            Mr. Hoke Patil, learned AGP appearing for appellant - State

submits that Reference Court has relied upon sale exemplar dated

26.05.2000, which was for small piece of 10 R land. Secondly,

classification of acquired land as irrigated or semi-irrigated is not made

appropriate    to   evidence   tendered   into   service   on   behalf   of

respondents/original claimants. Mr. Hoke Patil would further submit that

Reference Court has granted enhanced compensation along with interest

from the date of possession under Section 28 of Land Acquisition Act,

which is contrary to law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in case of

State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari reported in 2016 (4) ALL

MR 513.
                                    -3-
                                                          976-FA-2747-2024

6.          Per contra, learned Advocate appearing for respondents/

claimants would submit that appellants had challenged award passed by

Reference Court in L.A.R. No. 149 of 2018 by filing First Appeal No.1844

of 2024. The said reference pertains to selfsame notification and award

which is subject matter in present appeal. This Court rejected contentions

of appellant while upholding rate of semi-irrigated land @ Rs. 14,688/-

per R. Therefore, the whole basis of challenge by appellants in present

appeal does not survive. He fairly conceded that interest awarded under

Sections 28 and 34 can be corrected in tune with law laid down by Full

Bench of this Court in case of Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra).



7.          Having    considered   submissions    advanced      by   learned

Advocates appearing for respective parties, this Court finds that

Reference Court relied upon sale exemplar of 10 R land while making

assessment of compensation for acquired land. However, the sale

exemplar was dated 26.05.2000, whereas notification under Section 4

was issued on 05.05.2005.



8.          Looking to time gap, this Court while deciding First Appeal

No.1844 of 2024 considered escalation @ 10% per annum and deducted

10% amount having regard to proximity and potentiality of land. Further

deduction of 10% was considered on account of smallness of land.
                                    -4-
                                                          976-FA-2747-2024

Finally, this Court concluded that the rate of acquired land can be

assessed @ Rs.14,688/- per R classifying same to be semi-irrigated land.

In light of view taken by this Court while deciding First Appeal No.1844

of 2024, submissions advanced on behalf of appellants do not survive.



9.          Insofar as aspect of interest on compensation amount, the

law is settled by Full Bench of this Court in case of Kailash Shiva Rangari

(Supra). Therefore, claimants would be entitled for interest under

Sections 28 and 34 of Land Acquisition Act as granted by Reference Court

from the date of award i.e. 20.05.2006.



10.         With aforesaid modification, award passed by Reference

Court deserves to be maintained.



11.         First Appeal is accordingly disposed of.




                                           (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                                    JUDGE




Tandale