Bombay High Court

SHIVAJI SHANKAR KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

Since the controversy is identical to the earlier decision in First Appeal No.447 of 2007, the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,000/- per R for dry land with statutory benefits and interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as per Kailas Shiva Rangari.

Summary

This First Appeal was filed by Shivaji Shankar Kadam against the State of Maharashtra and another challenging the common Judgment and Award dated 24.11.2024 passed by the VI Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed, in Land Acquisition Reference No.257 of 1997 and connected LARs. The appellant's land was acquired from village Lonighat for the Upper Manjara Project (Dokewadi Project) under the same notification involved in First Appeal No.447 of 2007. The parties submitted that the controversy is squarely covered by the order dated 07.07.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.447 of 2007 and connected matters. The Court accepted this submission, finding the controversy identical and saw no reason to take a different view. The appeal was partly allowed, and the impugned award was modified. The appellant-claimant was held entitled to Rs.1,000/- per R for dry land, along with all statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellant was also entitled to interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Act in accordance with the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457. The remaining part of the Reference Court's award was left unaltered, and the appellant was directed to pay deficit court fees, if any, on the enhanced compensation.

Issues considered

Whether the present appeal is covered by the order dated 07.07.2026 in First Appeal No.447 of 2007 and connected matters, as the land was acquired from the same village, for the same public purpose, and under the same notification?
Whether the appellant-claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation at Rs.1,000/- per R for dry land and statutory benefits/interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34

Subjects

Land Acquisition
Compensation
Enhanced Compensation
Statutory Benefits
Interest
Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Upper Manjara Project
Dokewadi Project
Common Judgment
Full Bench Decision
Kailas Shiva Rangari

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:41303
6-FA-3210-2009.odt
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
6 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3210 OF 2009

Shivaji Shankar Kadam
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
…...
Mr. Shubham D. Jayabhar, Advocate h/f Mr. D.R. Jayabhar, Advocate for
Appellant-Acquiring
Mr. S.N. Morampalle, AGP for Respondent No.1-State
…...

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 04 SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

2. The present appeal arises out of 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.

3. 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.
6-FA-3210-2009.odt
2

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

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.
6-FA-3210-2009.odt
3

(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 ]
JUDGE
S P Rane

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…