Bombay High Court
SHANTABAI W/O APPASAHEB MOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
- Bench
- SHAILESH P BRAHME
Holding
The Court held that the appropriate compensation rate is Rs.5960 per R, derived from the uncontested Rs.3700 rate of LAR No.608/2011 with a 10% per annum escalation for five years.
Summary
The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for dry land acquired from Devgaon Khavne, arguing that the rate should be enhanced based on earlier reference court decisions and a National Lok Adalat settlement. The State opposed, contending that the 2013 rate of Rs.7586 per R was not final, the Lok Adalat rate was a settlement without privity, and the lands in prior cases were not comparable. The Court examined three prior rates: Rs.7586 per R from LAR No.457/2013 (pending appeal), Rs.6000 per R from a Lok Adalat settlement, and Rs.3700 per R from LAR No.608/2011 (uncontested). It rejected the first two rates as inapplicable and applied a 10% per annum escalation to the Rs.3700 rate for five years, arriving at Rs.5960 per R. The Court allowed the appeals in part, fixing the compensation at Rs.5960 per R and granting interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, while denying other statutory benefits. The order also directed the record be sent back to the reference court for award adjustment.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation rate fixed in earlier reference court decisions or Lok Adalat settlements can be applied to the present land acquisition case.
- Whether the rate of Rs.7586 per R from LAR No.457/2013 is binding despite a pending appeal.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation rate
- escalation
- Lok Adalat
- reference court
- interest
- dry land
- market value
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:8769
1 FA.3292-25 & ors.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3292 OF 2025
AANNA BANSI PRADHAN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3290 OF 2025
SHANTABAI W/O APPASAHEB MORE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3288 OF 2025
APPARAV @ APPASAHEB S/O VITTHALRAV MORE (DIED) THR LRA
BANDU AND ORS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3291 OF 2025
AASARAM S/O NARAYAN MORE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3289 OF 2025
DATTA BANSI PRADHAN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS
…
Advocate for Appellants : Mr. D. M. Kakade.
AGP for Respondent/s-State : Mr. S. V. Hange.
...
CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
RESERVED ON : 24.02.2026
PRONOUNCED ON : 27.02.2026
FINAL ORDER :-
1. Heard both sides finally at the admission stage with consent of the
parties.
1/6
2 FA.3292-25 & ors.odt
2. A common judgment and order dated 05.04.2017 passed by the
Reference Court in different references is assailed in these appeals by the
claimants. They are claiming enhancement by relying upon rate fixed in
First Appeal No.43 of 2023 or LAR. No.457 of 2013 or LAR. No.608 of 2011.
3. Learned counsel Mr. Kakade for the appellants submits that the
Reference Court in LAR. No.457 of 2013 has fixed the rate of Rs.7586/- per
R. which would be adopted in the present appeals also. He would further
submit that rate fixed in National Lok Adalat in First Appeal No.43 of 2023
emanating from LAR. No.214 of 2011 to the tune of Rs.4800/- be accepted.
By adding the benefit of escalation rate of Rs.6,000/- per R. is solicited. In
the alternative it is submitted that as per the rate of Rs.3700/- per R. arrived
at in LAR. No.608 of 2011, the rate of Rs.6207/- per R. be fixed, by adding
the benefit of escalation. The relevant judgments and the orders including
that of National Lok Adalat are placed on record by way of separate
compilation.
4. Per contra, learned AGP would vehemently oppose the claim of
enhancement. It is submitted that the rate of Rs.7586/- fixed in LAR. No.457
of 2013 is not final as first appeal against it is still pending. It is submitted
that rate arrived at in Lok Adalat cannot be basis for fixing the rate as it was
out of settlement and contract between the parties. Lastly, it is submitted
that there is no similarity in the lands acquired in LAR. No.608 of 2011 and
lands acquired in the present appeals. Reliance is placed on the common
order dated 23.12.2025 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.2506 of
2/6
3 FA.3292-25 & ors.odt
2023 and connected matters.
5. In these group of appeals, this Court is called upon to determine as
to which would be the most compatible rate, akin to the probable market
value. Three rates are pressed into service by the appellants which are
disputed by the respondent/acquiring body. All lands from village Devgaon
Khavne stood acquired vide notification dated 26.01.2010. Undisputedly,
the lands in question are dry lands. Award was passed on 20.07.2011
offering rate of Rs.1500/- per R. The Reference Court enhanced it to
Rs.2600/- per R. In these backdrop the submissions of the parties are
required to be assessed.
5. Following are the material particulars in the present first appeals :
6. The rate of Rs.7586/- per R. was fixed in LAR. No.457 of 2013 and
land in that case was acquired from village Ambhora Jahagir. The judgment
of LAR is under challenge in the first appeal which is subjudiced. Hence, I
3/6
4 FA.3292-25 & ors.odt
am not inclined to accept the rate.
7. Next rate which is pressed into service is of Rs.6,000/- per R. based
upon settlement arrived at in National Lok Adalat vide order dated
13.09.2025 in First Appeal No.43 of 2023. It was land from self-same
village. In this regard it is appropriate to appreciate the ratio of the
Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Pramod Gupta (Dead) by L.Rs. and
others ; (2005) 12 Supreme Court Cases 1. This Court had occasion to rely
upon the said judgment while deciding First appeal 2506 of 2023 and
connected matters on 23.12.2025. The principles of estoppel cannot be
made applicable for fixing the rate, is rightly submitted by learned AGP.
Besides that the rate fixed in Lok Adalat would be outcome of settlement
and the contract between the parties. There can be no privity of contract
between the parties of the present appeals. I, therefore, discard rate of
Rs.6,000/- per R.
8. In case of LAR. No.608 of 2011 decided by common judgment and
award dated 13.01.2017 land from village Mahora was acquired. The
notification in that case was issued on 26.08.2004. The rate was fixed at
Rs.3,700/- per R. No appeal is reported to have been filed against the
judgment of the Reference Court. The map produced on record shows that
village Mahora and village Devgaon Khavne share a common boundary.
9. Appellants are entitled to receive benefit of escalation by cumulative
effect. I find that rate of Rs.3700/- per R. can be said to be compatible one.
In that case, the notification was issued on 26.08.2004. If the escalation @
4/6
5 FA.3292-25 & ors.odt
Rs.10% per annum is added for five (5) years then rate comes to Rs.5958.88
per R. It is pertinent to note that in LAR. No.608 of 2011 the rate of
Rs.3700/- per R. was fixed for 1H. 72R. It is comparatively larger area than
the area of the lands acquired in the present appeals. But the rate is
acceptable to the appellants. For sake of convenience, I find that rate of
Rs.5960/- would be the appropriate figure.
10. For the reasons stated above, I pass following order :
ORDER
(i) First appeals are allowed partly.
(ii) The appellants shall be entitled to receive rate of Rs.5960/- per
R. for dry land.
(iii) The appellants shall not be entitled to interest and statutory
benefits for the delayed period.
(iv) The appellants shall be entitled to interest under Section 28 and
34 of the Land Acquisition Act from the date of award as per law
laid down in the judgment of Full Bench in case of State of
Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari [2016 AIR (Bom.) 141].
(v) Save and except above modification. Impugned judgment and
award passed by Reference Court shall stand unaltered.
(vi) The appellants shall pay deficit court fees, if any.
5/6
6 FA.3292-25 & ors.odt
(vii) Record and proceeding be sent back to the concerned Court, if
any.
(viii) Award be drawn accordingly.
(SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.)
...
vmk/-
6/6
Checking your session…