RAGHUNATH MUKTAJI WAHATULE (DIED) THR LRS PURNABAI AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

2026:BHC-AUG:26719
                                                                   FAs3277&3278-19

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              FIRST APPEAL NO. 3277 OF 2019

                 Kashinath Muktaji Wahatule                 ...    Appellant
                 R/o Babhulgaon Tq. Sillod Dist. Aurangabad

                 VERSUS

             1   The State of Maharashtra,
                 Through the Collector, Aurangabad

             2   Special Land Acquisition Officer,           ...   Respondents
                 Collector Office, Aurangabad

             3   The Executive Engineer,
                 Minor Irrigation Division No.1
                 Godawari Marathwada Patbandhare Vikas
                 Mahamandal, Sinchan Bhavan,
                 Jalna Road, Aurangabad.
                                            AND
                              FIRST APPEAL NO. 3278 OF 2019

                 Raghunath Muktaji Wahatule,                 ...   Appellant
                 Deceased, Through LRs.
             1   Purnabai Raghunath Wahatule

             2   Kausabai Uttam Kharat

             3   Kasabai Sanjay Kakade

             4   Sudhakar Raghunath Wahatule


             5   Ranjana Kashinath Kapade

             6   Kailas Rathunath Wahatule


             7   Sukhdeo Rathunath Wahatule
                 All R/o Babhulgaon Tq. Sillod
                 Dist. Aurangabad

                 VERSUS


                                                                               1 of 6
                                                       FAs3277&3278-19

1    The State of Maharashtra,
     Through the Collector, Aurangabad

2    Special Land Acquisition Officer,           ...   Respondents
     Collector Office, Aurangabad

3    The Executive Engineer,
     Minor Irrigation Division No.1
     Godawari Marathwada Patbandhare Vikas
     Mahamandal, Sinchan Bhavan,
     Jalna Road, Aurangabad.

Mr. N. J. Pahune Patil, Advocate for the Appellants
Mrs. M. L. Sangit, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/State
Mr. B. R. Survase, Advocate for Respondent No.3 Acquiring Body


                      CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
                        Dated : 7th July, 2026

PER COURT :-

1.      Since both these Appeals arise out of the common Judgment

and Award dated 02.02.2015 in two Reference Applications in respect

of the same acquisition proceedings and common submissions are

made, both these Appeals are decided by this common judgment. In

First Appeal No. 3277/2019, the acquired land was 1 Hectare 50 R out

of Gat No. 142, situated at Babhulgaon Tq. Sillod District Aurangabad

and Reference Application No. is 298/2008. In First Appeal No.

3278/2019, the acquired land was 1 Hectare 80 R out of Gat No. 140,

situated at Babhulgaon Tq. Sillod District Aurangabad and Reference

Application No. is 259/2008.


2.      The above referred lands came to be acquired for the Nillod


                                                                 2 of 6
                                                        FAs3277&3278-19

Major Irrigation Project.    The Section 4 Notification of the Land

Acquisition Act ( L. A. Act) was issued on 05.12.2005 and the final

Award was declared on 03.08.2006. The Special Land Acquisition

Officer (‘the SLAO’ for short) determined the rate at Rs.1100/- per R

considering the lands as dry lands.       Being not satisfied with the

compensation determined by the SLAO, the Claimants preferred the

above referred Reference Applications for enhanced compensation.

Common evidence was laid by the Claimants. Considering the evidence

on record, the learned Reference Court determined the rate at

Rs.2000/- per R for the dry lands.        The learned Reference Court

considered the acquired lands as seasonally irrigated lands and

determined the rate at Rs.3000/- per R.


3.       Heard the learned Advocate for the Claimants, learned

Advocate for the Acquiring Body and the learned AGP for the State.

With their assistance, perused the papers on record.


(A)     It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Claimants that,

        the Claimants have brought on record the two (2) Sale Deeds

        below Exh. 19 and Exh.20. However, the learned Reference

        Court considered the sale instance below Exh. 19, which was

        from the same village. He further submitted that, though the

        Award itself speaks that, there were wells in the acquired lands,

        on the basis of cropping pattern, the learned Reference Court

        considered the acquired lands as seasonally irrigated lands. He

                                                                    3 of 6
                                                         FAs3277&3278-19


       submitted that, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

       Chindha Fakira Patil v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,

       Jalgaon, 2012 (2) MLJ 530, the Claimants are entitled for

       compensation for their acquired lands by considering them as

       fully   irrigated   lands.    He   further   submitted   that,     the

       compensation accordingly be enhanced.


(B)    It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body

       that, the learned Reference Court has rightly discarded the

       sale deed below Exh.20 which was from the different village.

       He submitted that, since the evidence on record shows that the

       crops taken by the Claimants were not those of fully irrigated

       lands, the learned Reference Court has rightly considered the

       cropping pattern and treated the acquired lands as seasonally

       irrigated lands. He submitted that, no interference is called for

       with the impugned judgment and awards.


(C)    The learned AGP supports the contentions of the learned

       Advocate for the Acquiring Body.


4.      Undisputedly, the Claimants relied on two (2) sale instances

below Exh. 19 and Exh. 20.          Undisputedly, the sale instance below

Exh.20 was from the different village Nillod and the sale instance

below Exh. 19 was from the same village- Babhulgaon. Thus, no fault

can be found with the Reference Court in considering the sale instance


                                                                        4 of 6
                                                        FAs3277&3278-19

below Exh. 19 which was from the same village. The learned Reference

Court, on the basis of the cropping pattern, considered the acquired

lands as semi irrigated lands. Undisputedly, the Award passed by the

learned SLAO shows existence of wells in the acquired lands of the

Claimants. The said aspect has been considered by the learned

Reference Court as can be seen from the observation in para 13 of the

judgment. This being the undisputed position, considering the acquired

lands as seasonally irrigated lands solely on the basis of the cropping

pattern is against the decision in Chindha Fakira Patil (supra), which

has been referred to in the judgment of the learned Reference Court.

Thus, the claimants shall be entitled to compensation for the acquired

lands by considering them as fully irrigated lands. As there is no

challenge to the rate of Rs.2,000/- per R determined by the learned

Reference Court for dry land on the basis of the sale instance at Exh.19,

the rate for the fully irrigated land would be double the said rate, i.e.

Rs.4,000/- per R, as per the settled position under the law. According

to the learned Advocate for the Claimants, the claimants        shall be

entitled for the interest under Section 34 of the L. A. Act as per the

decision of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva

Rangara, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J.457 which is not disputed. Considering all

these aspects of the matter, the Awards passed by the learned Reference

Court need interference and compensation needs to be enhanced.

Hence, the following order:

                                                                    5 of 6
                                                                 FAs3277&3278-19

                                         ORDER


           (1)   Both the First Appeals are partly allowed.

           (2)   The      Appellants/Claimants   shall   be   entitled   for     the
                 compensation at the market rate of Rs.4000/- (Rupees Four
                 Thousand only) per R for their acquired lands being fully
                 irrigated lands.

           (3)   The Claimants shall be entitled for the statutory benefits on
                 the enhanced compensation including interest under Section
                 34 of the Land Acquisition Act as per the decision of this
                 Court in Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra).

           (4)   The Claimants shall not be entitled to the interest for the
                 delayed period.

           (5)   The Claimants shall deposit the deficit court fees.

           (6)   No order as to costs.

           (4)   Record and Proceedings be sent back to the learned Reference
                 Court.




                                                         (NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.)


JPChavan




                                                                               6 of 6