Bombay High Court

JANU YADAVRAO JADHAV L.RS. BABURAO JANU JADHAV AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

The appeal is partly allowed, modifying the award to grant Rs.1,000 per R, statutory benefits, and interest as per the earlier order and applicable statutes.

Summary

The appeal challenges a 24 November 2004 judgment and award of a land acquisition proceeding concerning land in Lonighat village acquired for the Upper Manjara (Dokewadi) Project. The appellants argued that their case is identical to that decided in First Appeal No. 447 of 2007, which was resolved by an order dated 7 July 2026. The Court accepted this submission, finding no reason to depart from the earlier decision. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed, modifying the award to grant Rs.1,000 per R for dry land, statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and interest under Sections 28 and 34 as per the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari. The remainder of the original award was left unchanged and pending civil applications were disposed.

Issues considered

The appeal should be decided independently or in accordance with the earlier order in First Appeal No. 447 of 2007.
Whether the appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,000 per R for dry land.
Whether statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 apply.
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
Upper Manjara Project
precedent
partial relief

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43346

                                                                             FA 3209/09
                                                   1

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                  6 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3209 OF 2009

                 JANU YADAVRAO JADHAV L.RS. BABURAO JANU JADHAV AND ORS
                                           VERSUS
                                THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR
                                               ...
                           Advocate for Appellant : Mr. D.R. Jayabhar
                          AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Dande
                                               ...

                                 CORAM         : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                 Dated         : September 22, 2026

            PER COURT :-

            1.       Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

            2.       The present appeal arises out of the judgment and award dated

            24.11.2004 passed by the learned VI Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed

            in LAR No. 260/1997.

            3.       The learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned AGP

            submit that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely

            covered by the order dated 07.07.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal

            No.447 of 2007 and connected matters, as the land of the appellant was

            acquired from the same village, i.e. Lonighat, for the same public purpose,

            i.e. Upper Manjara Project (Dokewadi Project), and under the very same

            notification as involved in the said appeal. They, therefore, submit that the

            present appeal may also be disposed of in terms of the said order.

            4.       Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for

            the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the

            controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by

            this Court by order dated 07.07.2026 in First Appeal No.447 of 2007 and
                                                                    FA 3209/09
                                        2

connected matters, I see no reason to take a different view. The present

appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment

and order. Hence, the following order:

                                   ORDER

(i)      The First Appeal is partly allowed.

(ii)     The common impugned Judgment and Award dated 24.11.2024

passed by the learned VI Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed, in Land

Acquisition Reference No.257 of 1997 and connected LARs is modified to the

aforesaid extent.

(iii)    The appellant-claimant is entitled to receive and amount of Rs.

1,000/- per R for dry land.

(iv)     The appellant-claimant shall be entitled to all statutory benefits

under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in accordance with law.

(v)      The appellant-claimant shall be entitled to interest under Sections

28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, 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.

(vi)     The remaining part of the Judgment and Award passed by the

learned Reference Court shall remain unaltered.

(vii)    The modified award be drawn accordingly.

(viii)   The appellant-claimant shall pay the deficit Court fees, if any, on the

enhanced compensation.

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



                                               ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )

ssc/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…