Bombay High Court
DATTATRAY VAJINATH BOKADEversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court dismissed the claimants' appeals, partially allowed the acquiring body's appeals, modified the award to grant interest only from the date of award, and denied rental compensation.
Summary
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) heard a massive group of first appeals arising from a common land acquisition proceeding for a minor irrigation project in Latur. Claimants alleged that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and affirmed by the Reference Court was inadequate, arguing that the land was irrigated and should fetch a higher rate, and that interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act should be payable from the date of possession. The acquiring body contended that the award was excessive and that the Reference Court erred by considering post‑notification sale deeds and by granting interest from possession. After evaluating the evidence, including expert testimony and numerous sale deeds, the Court held that the Reference Court correctly classified most of the land as dry, applied appropriate market rates, and that interest under Section 34 could only be awarded from the date of the award, not from possession. Consequently, the claimants' appeals were dismissed, the acquiring body’s appeals were partly allowed to modify the interest provision, and rental compensation was denied.
Issues considered
- The adequacy of compensation awarded for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act.
- Whether the land should be classified as dry, semi‑irrigated or irrigated for valuation purposes.
- Whether interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act is payable from the date of possession or from the date of award.
- Whether rental compensation is payable to the claimants.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 18, 34, 4, 6
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- valuation
- interest under section 34
- rental compensation
- dry land
- irrigated land
- expert witness
- sale deed
- reference court
- appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:24402-DB
(1) FA-1574-2009 +
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1574 OF 2009
1. Shivaji Bapurao Jadhav
Died Through LRs…
1/1. Sojarbai Shivaji Jadhav
Age: 71 years, Occu: Household
R/o. Datta Nagar, Near Adarsh
Colony, Latur.
1/2. Rajeshri Madhavrao Patil
Age: 55 years, Occu: Household
R/o. Sant Dnyaneshwar Nagar, Latur.
1/3. Devidas Shivaji Jadhav
Died Through LRs…
1/3/1.Pallavi Devidas Jadhav
Age: 31 years, Occu: Household
1/3/2.Kartiki Devidas Jadhav
Age: Minor, Occu: Nil
1/3/3.Viraj Devidas Jadhav
Age: Minor, Occu: Nil
Appellant Nos. 1/3/1 to 1/3/3 are
R/o. Adarsh Colony, Latur.
2. Gangadhar Bapurao Jadhav
Age: 48 years, Occu: Agri.,
(2) FA-1574-2009 +
3. Tukaram Shivajirao Jadhav
Age: 36 years, Occu: Agri.,
4. Dnyanoba Shivajirao Jadhav
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
5. Kisan Dattatraya Jadhav
Age: 48 years, Occu: Agri.,
All R/o. : Khopegaon,
Tq. & Dist. Latur … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2281 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Mohan Rangrao More
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
(3) FA-1574-2009 +
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 290 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Devidas Gangaram Waghmare
Age: 52 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2295 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
(4) FA-1574-2009 +
VERSUS
1. Vishnudas Saduram More
Age: 45 years, Occu: Agri. & h.h.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 289 OF 2009
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION NO. 19 OF 2026
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Sub-Divisional Engineer
P.W.D., Sub-Division No.1,
Nilanga.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Distict Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Sidram Chanappa Milgire
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Gurunath Chanappa Milgire
Age: 34 years, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Kasar-Shirsi, Tq. Nilanga,
Dist. Latur. … RESPONDENTS
(5) FA-1574-2009 +
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 267 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Vilas Pandurang Shendge
Age: Minor, U/G of Real Mother
2. Dhondabai Pandurang Shendge
Age: 50 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
3. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 375 OF 2011
. Anirudha Govind More
Age: 57 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
(6) FA-1574-2009 +
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 266 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Venkat Krushna Pawar
Age: 36 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2284 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
(7) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Sow. Chandrakala Nivruti Phad
Age: 47 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1575 OF 2009
Dagdu Baliram More
Died Through LRs…
1. Laxman Dagdu More
Age: 52 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Smt. Mankarnabai Dagdu More
Age: 92 years, Occu: Household,
3. Maruti Dagdu More
Age: 72 years, Occu: Service,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
4. Sow. Karuna Madankumar Hupate
Age: 60 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Mumbai Road, Nashik,
Tq. & Dist. Nashik.
5. Sow. Meghana Balbhim Irape
Age: 57 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
6. Sow. Jyoti Shrikishan Satpute Irape
(8) FA-1574-2009 +
Age: 55 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Ghat Pimpari, Tq. Washi,
Dist. Osmanabad.
7. Balaij Dagdu More
Age: 50 years, Occu: Medical Practitioner,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 263 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
Dagdu Baliram More
Died Through LRs…
1. Laxman Dagdu More
Age: 52 years, Occu: Agri.,
(9) FA-1574-2009 +
2. Smt. Mankarnabai Dagdu More
Age: 92 years, Occu: Household,
3. Maruti Dagdu More
Age: 72 years, Occu: Service,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
4. Sow. Karuna Madankumar Hupate
Age: 60 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Mumbai Road, Nashik,
Tq. & Dist. Nashik.
5. Sow. Meghana Balbhim Irape
Age: 57 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
6. Sow. Jyoti Shrikishan Satpute Irape
Age: 55 years, Occu: Household,
R/o. Ghat Pimpari, Tq. Washi,
Dist. Osmanabad.
7. Balaij Dagdu More
Age: 50 years, Occu: Medical Practitioner,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 291 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
( 10 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Sudam Gyanoba More Waghmare
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 269 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Shivaji Laxman Shinde
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Shankar Laxman Shinde
Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
( 11 ) FA-1574-2009 +
3. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2292 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Mahadeo Bapurao Deshmukh
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 374 OF 2011
Dattatray Vajinath Bokade
Age: 72 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
( 12 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2297 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Kaushabai Bhujangrao More
Age: 36 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 371 OF 2011
Ram Ganpati More
Died Through LRs…
1. Anjali d/o. Ram More
Age: 12 years, Occu: Education,
2. Kalpesh s/o. Ram More
Age: 15 years, Occu: Education,
Both under guardian of their
( 13 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Natural Mother Appellant No.3.
3. Usha w/o. Ram More
Age: 40 years, Occu: Household,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1577 OF 2009
1. Baburao Malba Deshmukh
Died Through LRs…
i. Mahadeo Baburao Deshmukh
Age: 55 years, Occu: Agri.,
ii. Shrihari Baburao Deshmukh
Age: 50 years, Occu: Agri.,
iii. Bharat Baburao Deshmukh
Age: 48 years, Occu: Agri.,
iv. Bhagwat Baburao Deshmukh
Age: 45 years, Occu: Agri.,
v. Vasant Baburao Deshmukh
Age: 41 years, Occu: Agri.,
( 14 ) FA-1574-2009 +
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 259 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Jalindhar Tulsiram Ghayal
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Navnath Tulsiram Ghayal
Age: 22 years, Occu: Agri.,
3. Prabhakar Tulsiram Ghayal
Age: 20 years, Occu: Agri.,
4. Gorakh Tulsiram Ghayal
Age: 38 years, Occu: Agri.,
( 15 ) FA-1574-2009 +
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
5. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2288 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Nagnath Hanmantrao Kaname
Age: 55 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 369 OF 2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3677 OF 2026
Subhash Narsing Korkalle
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
( 16 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 311 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Vijaykumar Mohanrao More
Age: 28 years, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2287 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
( 17 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Kondiba Gangaram Waghmare
Age: 55 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 271 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Namdeo Bali More
Age: 65 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 398 OF 2011
( 18 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Arun Pandurang More
Age: 43 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Sanjay Pandurang More
Age: 38 years, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2283 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Bhagwan Vithoba More
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
( 19 ) FA-1574-2009 +
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 367 OF 2011
. Kaushabai Bhujangrao More
Age: 44 years, Occu: Agri. & Household,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 293 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Shripati Ganpati Taralkar
Age: 68 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
( 20 ) FA-1574-2009 +
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 358 OF 2011
. Mohan Rangrao More
Age: 68 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 268 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Shivaji Bapurao Jadhav
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Tukaram Bapurao Jadhav
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
3. Tukaram Shahajirao Jadhav
( 21 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Age: 28 years, Occu: Agri.,
4. Dnyanoba Shahajirao Jadhav
Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri.,
5. Kisan Dattatraya Jadhav
Age: 48 years, Occu: Agri.,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
6. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 262 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Deepak Arjun Bansode
Age: Major, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2282 OF 2014
( 22 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Vithal Nivruti Waghmare
Age: 30 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 372 OF 2011
. Kaushabai Bhujangrao More
Age: 44 years, Occu: Agri. & Household,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 308 OF 2009
( 23 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Vinod Raosaheb More
Age: 38 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2294 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Shahajirao Saduram Jambaldare
Age: 65 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
( 24 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Vasant Bhanudas More
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2293 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
( 25 ) FA-1574-2009 +
. Ram Ganpati More
Died Through LRs…
1. Anjali d/o. Ram More
Age: 04 years, Occu: Nil,
2. Kalpesh s/o. Ram More
Age: 04 years, Occu: Nil,
Both U/G of their Mother.
3. Usha w/o. Ram More
Age: 32 years, Occu: Household,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
4. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 270 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Sow. Trivenibai Arjun Bansode
Age: 50 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
( 26 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 359 OF 2011
. Mahadeo Bapurao Deshmukh
Age: 55 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2286 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Bapurao Nivruti Jambaldare
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
( 27 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 261 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Ganpati Namdeo Shinde
Age: 78 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2291 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
( 28 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Subhash Madhav Jambaldare
Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 287 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Shankar Chander More
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2285 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
( 29 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Kaushabai Bhujangrao More
Age: 36 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 310 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Subhash Narsing Korkalle
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2298 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
( 30 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Shripati Govind More
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Baliram Govind More
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
3. Anant Govind More
Age: 30 years, Occu: Agri.,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
4. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 373 OF 2011
. Nagnath Hanumantrao Kaname
Age: 63 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
( 31 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 313 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Sahebrao Kisanrao More
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 260 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
( 32 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Pralhad Namdeo More
Age: 50 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 309 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Rajendra Pandurang Jambaldare
Age: 30 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2280 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
( 33 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Anirudha Govind More
Age: 49 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2289 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Janardhan Gangaram Waghmare
Age: 50 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 272 OF 2009
( 34 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Vidyasagar Maroti More
Age: Major, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 288 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Digambar Gangaram Waghmare
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
( 35 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2296 OF 2014
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Dattatraya Vaijanath Bokade
Age: Major, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1576 OF 2009
. Sow. Trivenabai Arjun Bansode
Age: 58 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
( 36 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 307 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Baliram Govind More
Age: 55 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 273 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
( 37 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Pralhad Namdeo More
Age: 45 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Vasant Namdeo More
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
3. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 265 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Udhav Venkatrao More
Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Madhav Venkatrao More
Age: 30 years, Occu: Agri.,
3. Shivaji Venkatrao More
Age: 26 years, Occu: Agri.,
4. Shankar Venkatrao More
Age: 23 years, Occu: Agri.,
( 38 ) FA-1574-2009 +
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
5. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 264 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Ankush Govindrao More
Age: 40 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 368 OF 2011
. Vasant Bhanudas More
Age: 48 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
( 39 ) FA-1574-2009 +
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 370 OF 2011
1. Shripati Govind More
Age: 48 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Baliram Govind More
Age: 68 years, Occu: Agri.,
3. Anant Govind More
Age: 38 years, Occu: Agri.,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 314 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
( 40 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Arun Pandurang More
Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri.,
2. Sanjay Pandurang More
Age: 30 years, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
3. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 258 OF 2009
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Rajendra Vithalrap Patil
Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
( 41 ) FA-1574-2009 +
AND
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 9619 OF 2008
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5908 OF 2008
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
1. Chandrakant Gundu More
Age: 74 years, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 9511 OF 2008
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5954 OF 2008
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
( 42 ) FA-1574-2009 +
VERSUS
1. Baburao Malba Deshmukh
Age: Major, Occu: Agri.,
R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 9523 OF 2008
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
Sow. Dagdubai Govind More
Died Through LRs...
1. Shripati Govind More
Age: Major, Occu: Agri.,
2. Baliram Govind More
Age: Major, Occu: Agri.,
Both R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
3. Anant Govind More
Died Through LRs…
( 43 ) FA-1574-2009 +
3-1. Jaymala Anant More
Age: 43 years, Occu: Household,
3-2. Dipali Anant More
Age: 14 years, Occu: Student,
3-3. Shubham Anant More
Age: 12 years, Occu: Student,
3-4. Sonali Anant More
Age: 10 years, Occu: Student,
3-5. Madhuri Anant More
Age: 8 years, Occu: Student,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
4. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
AND
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 9519 OF 2008
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5975 OF 2008
1. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation
Development Corporation
Through Its Executive Engineer,
Latur Minor Irrigation Division, Latur.
2. Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
( 44 ) FA-1574-2009 +
1. Shivaji Chandar More
Died Through LRs...
1.1. Tejabai Shivaji More
Age: 45 years, Occu: Household,
1.2. Archana Kiran Kamkhede
Age: 25 years, Occu: Household,
1.3. Jyoti Pandit Zangurde
Age: 23 years, Occu: Household,
1.4. Ravi Shivaji More
Age: 21 years, Occu: Agri.,
1.5. Kiran Shivaji More
Age: 18 years, Occu: Agri.,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
2. Sandipan Chandar More
Age: 42 years, Occu: Agri.,
3. Dinkar Chandar More
Age: 28 years, Occu: Agri.,
4. Maroti Chandar More
Age: 28 years, Occu: Agri.,
All R/o. Khopegaon, Tq. & Dist. Latur.
5. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur. … RESPONDENTS
...
( 45 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Ms. Chanchal alongwith Mr. A. A. Phad, Advocate for the appellant Nos.
1 & 2 in F.A. No. 1574/2009.
Mr. N. P. Patil Jamalpurkar for appellant Nos. 3 to 5 in F. A. No.
1574/2009 and respective appellants and respondents in connected first
appeals (through V.C.).
Mr. G. D. Kale, Advocate for appellants in F.A. No. 371/2011 and F. A.
No. 1575/2009.
Mr. V. K. Kotecha, A.G.P. for the State.
Mr. S. G. Sangle, Advocate for respective appellants and respondents for
G.M.I.D.C.
Mr. G. K. Sontakke, Advocate for respective respondents.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, JJ.
Date on which reserved for judgment : 02nd April, 2026.
Date on which judgment pronounced : 22nd June, 2026.
JUDGMENT (PER KISHORE C. SANT, J.) :-
1. This group of appeals arises out of judgment and awards passed by
the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Latur. Some appeals
are preferred by the acquiring body challenging the judgment and award
passed by the learned Reference Court i.e. 2 nd Joint Civil Judge Senior
Division, Latur. The claimants have also filed appeals challenging
judgment and award to the extent of not granting enhancement by the
learned Reference Court as prayed for by the claimants. For the purpose
of convenience following chart is prepared showing the appeals
( 46 ) FA-1574-2009 +
preferred by the acquiring body and by the claimants.
Sr. L.A.R. Nos. Judgment F.A. filed by F.A. filed by
No. and award Acquiring Body claimants
date
Group I
1. 315/1999 264/2009 -
2. 316/1999 288/2009 -
3. 317/1999 20.02.2007 308/2009 -
4. 318/1999 290/2009 -
5. 320/1999 231/2009 -
6. 321/1999 287/2009 -
7. 322/1999 309/2009 -
8. 324/1999 st. 9619/2008 -
9. 325/1999 307/2009 -
10. 326/1999 293/2009 -
11. 327/1999 310/2009 369/2011
12. 331/1999 265/2009 -
13. 332/1999 314/2009 398/2011
14. 333/1999 258/2009 -
15. 439/1999 311/2009 -
16. 440/1999 292/2009 368/2011
Group II
17. 604/1999 272/2009 -
18. 605/1999 267/2009 -
19. 607/1999 260/2009 -
16.03.2007
20. 608/1999 263/2009 1575/2009
21. 610/1999 st. 9523/2008 -
22. 823/1999 273/2009 -
23. 916/1999 268/2009 1574/2009
24. 917/1999 st. 9519/2008 -
25. 919/1999 st. 9511/2008 1577/2009
26. 920/1999 269/2009 -
( 47 ) FA-1574-2009 +
27. 921/1999 262/2009 -
28. 922/1999 270/2009 1576/2009
29. 923/1999 271/2009 -
30. 924/1999 16.03.2007 259/2009 -
31. 925/1999 261/2009 -
32. 958/1999 266/2009 -
33. 1068/1999 313/2009 -
Group III
34. 379/1999 2282/2014 -
35. 380/1999 2280/2014 375/2011
36. 381/1999 23.02.2007 2289/2014 -
37. 382/1999 2286/2014 -
38. 383/1999 2292/2014 359/2011
39. 385/1999 2296/2014 374/2011
40. 388/1999 2294/2014 -
41. 389/1999 2287/2014 -
42. 390/1999 2291/2014 -
43. 391/1999 2298/2014 370/2011
44. 392/1999 2288/2014 373/2011
45. 394/1999 2284/2014 -
46. 395/1999 2285/2014 367/2011
47. 396/1999 2283/2014 -
48. 397/1999 2293/2014 371/2011
49. 398/1999 2281/2014 358/2011
50. 399/1999 2297/2014 372/2011
51. 401/1999 2295/2014 -
2. Since the appeals are arising from the common judgment in
L.A.R’s. and are arising out of the same acquisition proceeding bearing
No. 1993/LA/CR-101 all the appeals are taken up together and are
( 48 ) FA-1574-2009 +
being decided by way of common judgment by consent of the parties. In
all the appeals record and proceeding is received. First Appeal
No. 1574/2009 is already admitted.
3. The parties are referred to as claimants and acquiring body for the
purpose of convenience. The facts in short giving rise to the present
appeals are that the claimants were the owners and possessors of the
lands acquired for the purpose of construction of minor irrigation project
Katpur, Tq. and Dist. Latur. The total land acquired in this group is 104
Hectares and 24 R from villages Khopegaon, Kanheri, Wasangaon and
Latur. The lands are acquired from the villages as below :
Village Area
Khopegaon 101 H 58 R
Kanheri 1 H 29 R
Wasangaon 0.74 R
Latur 0.63 R
Total = 104 H 24 R
4. The possession of the lands was taken on 16.05.1992. The
preliminary notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for
short “the said Act”) was published on 05.05.1994. On 19.05.1994
( 49 ) FA-1574-2009 +
notification was published in the Government Gazette. On 31.10.1994
local publication was made. On 10.11.1995 notification under section 6
of the said Act came to be issued in the Government Gazette. The local
publication of the notification under section 6 of the said Act was issued
on 14.04.1996. The award came to be passed by the Special Land
Acquisition Officer (S.L.A.O.) granting compensation at the rate of Rs.
1,50,000/- per Hectare for villages Khopegaon and Wasangaon, Rs.
1,60,000/- per Hectare for village Kanheri and Rs. 2,40,000/- per
Hectare for Latur.
5. The claimants, being aggrieved by the award approached the
Collector by filing references under section 18 of the said Act. The
references came to be referred to the Civil Court. The learned 2 nd Joint
Civil Judge Senior Division, Latur clubbed the references. By way of
pursis common evidence was laid in L.A.R. No. 604/1994 i.e. First
Appeal No. 272/2009. The learned Reference Court on recording the
evidence and on appreciation held that the appropriate rate would be
Rs. 4,00,000/- per Acre considering all the lands as dry land except land
( 50 ) FA-1574-2009 +
in L.A.R. No. 925/1999. In addition, the learned Reference Court
awarded rental compensation in L.A.R. Nos. 823/1999, 916/1999,
920/1999, 922/1999, 924/1999 and 925/1999 and also awarded
compensation towards trees alongwith all the statutory benefits. It is the
case of the claimants that the rate awarded is inadequate and
insufficient. The learned Reference Court ought to have awarded the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,00,000/- per Acre. On the other
hand, by preferring the appeal, the acquiring body has challenged the
quantum stating that the amount awarded by the learned Reference
Court is exorbitant. The S.L.A.O. had rightly granted the compensation
by considering the sale instances from the year 1990 onwards. The ready
reckoner rate was even lesser than the rate awarded by the S.L.A.O. It is
thus prayed that the appeals of the acquiring body deserves to be
allowed by rejecting the appeals filed by the claimants.
6. This Court has heard the parties and has gone through the record.
The Civil Application No. 3677/2026 is filed for considering additional
evidence.
( 51 ) FA-1574-2009 +
7. The learned advocate Mr. Jamalpurkar for the claimants
vehemently argued that the learned Reference Court has failed to
appreciate the evidence in its proper perspective. The lands are situated
on Latur-Solapur Highway. There was material to show that the lands
are irrigated lands where the crop like Sugarcane was taken. However,
the learned Reference Court still treated the lands to be dry lands and
has committed an error. By way of additional evidence, it is shown that
in subsequent awards learned Reference Court has granted the rate of
Rs. 37.5 per sq. ft. He further submitted that interest under section 34
of the said Act is not granted and he prays for allowing the first appeals.
. Learned Advocates Mr. Kale, Mr. Phad and Mr. Sontakke adopted
the arguments of learned Advocate Mr. Jamalpurkar.
8. The learned advocate Mr. Sangle for the acquiring body
vehemently argued his appeals and opposed the appeals of the
claimants. He submitted that the lands were taken in possession by
private negotiation. The award was rightly passed by the S.L.A.O. No
interference was required by the learned Reference Court. He also
submitted on record written notes of arguments. He submitted that the
( 52 ) FA-1574-2009 +
learned Reference Court considered the sale deed dated 31.05.1997
which is after the date of notification which could not have been
considered. He invited attention to the deposition of the witnesses. The
sale deed dated 31.05.1997 was in respect of the land which was
acquired for the hostel. The transactions which are considered by the
Court were commercial transactions. The valuer’s evidence is wrongly
believed by the Court. The expert witness could not be said to be an
expert witness as he was only having M.Sc. PH.D. in Agronomy that is
only crop science and not in Horticulture. So far as additional evidence
is concerned, he submitted that, no case is made out to consider the
additional evidence. He prays for allowing the appeals of the acquiring
body by rejecting the appeals of the claimants. He relied upon the
following judgments :
(i) Smt. Padma Uppal and Others Vs. State of Punjab
and Others, (1977) 1 SCC 330.
(ii) Prithvi Raj Taneja (Dead) By L.Rs. Vs. The State of
Madhya Pradesh and Another, (1977) 1 SCC 684.
(iii) Ravinder Narain And Another Vs. Union Of India,
(2003) 4 SCC 481.
(iv) Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage
Board and others Vs. K. S. Gangadharappa and Another,
( 53 ) FA-1574-2009 +
(2009) 11 SCC 164.
(v) A. Natesam Pillai Vs. Special Tahsildar, Land
Acquisition, Tiruchy, (2010) 9 SCC 118.
(vi) Special Land Acquisition Officer and Another Vs.
M. K. Rafiq Saheb, (2011) 7 SCC 714.
(vii) Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (Registered), Faridkot
and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others, (2012) 5 SCC
432.
(viii) State of Maharashtra Vs. Santaram Mahadu Pingle
and Others, 2008 (3) Bom.C.R. 715.
(ix) State of H.P. Vs. Jailal and Others, (1999) 7 SCC
280.
(x) Lal Chand Vs. Union of India and Another, (2009) 15
SCC 769.
(xi) G.M.I.D.C. and Another Vs. Nanasaheb Apparao
More, in First Appeal No. 5148/2017 passed by this
Court.
(xii) Chimanlal Hargovinddas Vs. Special Land
Acquisition Officer, Poona and Another, (1988) 3 SCC
751.
(xiii) Union of India Vs. Pramod Gupta (Dead) by L.Rs.
And Others, (2005) 12 SCC 1.
(xiv) Manilal Shamalbhai Patel (Deceased) through his
Legal Heirs and others Vs. Officer on Special Duty (Land
( 54 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Acquisition) and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 634.
(xv) Radhey Sham Vs. State of Haryana and Others,
(2022) 17 SCC 148.
(xvi) Subh Ram and Others Vs. State of Haryana and
Another, (2010) 1 SCC 444.
9. On hearing the arguments and submissions this Court has to
consider (i) as to whether the learned Trial Judge has rightly enhanced
the compensation and the compensation awarded is adequate and
sufficient compensation and (ii) whether the impugned judgment
requires interference at the hands of this Court.
10. In support of the case of the claimants they examined five
witnesses. In group No. 1 Vijaykumar More is examined as PW-1, in
group No. 2 Gangadhar Jadhav and in group No. 3 Nagnath Kaname is
examined as PW-1. Except PW-1 all other witnesses are same in all the
three groups i.e. PW-2 Keshav Pawar, PW-3 Dnyanoba Pinate,
PW-4 Ramchandra Baraskar and PW- 5 Govind Parikh . They relied upon
the copy of sale deed dated 31.05.1997, sale deed dated 15.10.1994,
award dated 04.04.1998 in respect of some other lands from the same
( 55 ) FA-1574-2009 +
village. They also relied upon deposition of one Mr. Bajrang Malu. As
against that, the acquiring body has examined only one witness i.e.
Manohar Pandurang Gaikwad.
11. Witness Vijaykumar More is the claimant in L.A.R. No. 439/1999.
He stated in his evidence that the land acquired is of rich quality and is
well developed. The land would fetch Rs. 21 Lakh per Acre for irrigated
land and Rs. 10 Lakh for dry land. In addition he stated that there was
Well situated in his land. There were trees, tubewell, Horticulture in the
land. He also claimed that certain trees were standing in the land and
some structure. He relied upon the sale deed in respect of land Survey
No. 42 of village Kanheri which was sold by one Brijlal Joshi to Bajrang
Malu. Under sale deed 12 R land was sold for consideration of
Rs. 1,80,000/- and the same is at the distance of one k.m. from the land
acquired. He deposed that, he had taken sugarcane crop in the land. He
was also cultivating vegetables and flowers. He was getting
Rs. 1,00,000/- per Acre from the land by providing irrigation facilities.
The distance of Khopegaon is hardly one k.m. from the Latur city. There
( 56 ) FA-1574-2009 +
are facilities available in the village. He relied upon the award in Land
Acquisition Reference No. 509/1993 where the Court awarded the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 66/- per sq. ft. and the said land is
around one k.m. from his land. In the cross-examination, he could not
state as to when the land came into municipal council limits. He did not
file 7/12 extract showing that he was having Well and borewell in his
land. He accepted that his land is at the distance of 5 to 6 k.m. from the
land of one Babasaheb Jadhav acquired for road. Thus, it is seen that he
could not produce any evidence that the lands are irrigated lands.
12. Witness Keshav Pawar is examined as an expert witness. This
witness was a Dean in Agricultural University, Parbhani. He was
professor of Agronomy. He had given evidence in respect of trees in the
land. In the cross-examination he accepted that he did not issue
intimation to the Collector before visiting the spot for preparing
valuation report. He was not possessing any registration certificate from
concerned department to show that he was registered valuer. He could
not tell details of plantation.
( 57 ) FA-1574-2009 +
13. Next witness Dnyanoba Pinate was examined as he sold his land in
the year 1997 to one Shahu College at Latur at the rate of
Rs. 12,00,000/-. The said land admeasures one Acre. In the cross-
examination he answered that his land is near to one Cinema Theatre.
14. Bajrang Malu who purchased the land and was examined stated
about the purchase of land of 20 R from Brijlal Joshi for Rs.1,80,000/-
from Survey No. 42. He stated that at the relevant time the rate of
agricultural land was Rs. 8,00,000/- per Acre. In the cross-examination
he accepted that the land was purchased jointly with one Abdul Karim
and he has paid only Rs. 90,000/- towards his share. He could not give
the boundaries of Survey No. 42.
15. Ramchandra Baraskar is examined as expert witness as he was in
service as Surveyor Assistant and thereafter became valuer and
consultant. He deposed that there was Well situated in the land with
borewell. He accepted that he was not accompanied by any independent
person while taking the survey. He had taken the rough notes of
measurement. However, he could not produce the notes of the same
( 58 ) FA-1574-2009 +
report. No notice was served upon the Government prior to his visit to
the land.
16. The last witness Govind Parikh who has seen the sale deed
between Brijlal Joshi and Bajrang Malu.
17. So far as appeals in group Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, though PW-
1 is different, however, they have deposed on the same lines as that of
PW-1 in appeals in group No. 1 and therefore, their evidence is not
separately discussed.
18. The respondent/acquiring body examined Mr. Manohar Pandurang
Gaikwad as DW-1 in all the three groups. DW-1 deposed that, he gave
the date of acquisition of land and the purpose for which the land is
acquired. He stated that, the valuation was properly done by the
S.L.A.O. on considering the relevant material such as earlier sale
instances of the lands in near area. In the cross-examination, he
specifically deposed that, he never saw personally the structure and
construction on the land acquired. He could not give the names of the
( 59 ) FA-1574-2009 +
officers who were present at the time of measurement. He could not
give the names of the claimants. He could not identify the claimants.
He could not give the survey numbers. This witness was working as Sub
Divisional Engineer in Minor Irrigation since 2003. At the relevant time
he was working at Omerga, District Osmanabad. On going through his
evidence, this Court finds that, his evidence is not of much use to the
respondent.
19. On this evidence and by considering various judgments the learned
Reference Court came to conclusion that the proper value of the land
would be Rs. 4,00,000/- per Acre considering the lands to be dry lands
except irrigated land where he awarded the rate of Rs. 8,00,000/- per
Acre. Before discussing the evidence and dealing with the submissions
we feel it necessary to discuss the judgments relied upon by the parties.
20. In the case of Smt. Padma Uppal and Others (supra), the Hon’ble
Apex Court considered that the sale instances of the small piece of land
need not be considered for the purpose of deciding the adequate
compensation when large area of land is acquired. In the case of
( 60 ) FA-1574-2009 +
Ravinder Narain And Another (supra), it is again held that, the rate fixed
of smaller plot in the same vicinity can be the basis for fixation of rate
for large area acquired. The Court is free to make comparison of the
prices paid for small piece of land subject to necessary deductions and
adjustments. The judgment in the case of Karnataka Urban Water Supply
And Drainage Board And Others (supra) is again on the consideration of
the sale instances of the small area.
21. In the case of Prithvi Raj Taneja (supra), it is held that, the Court
has to consider the market value of the land on the date of publication of
the notification under section 4 of the said Act.
22. In the case of A. Natesam Pillai (supra), the Court discussed the
consideration for deciding fair and just compensation for the land
acquired. It is held that, the sale instances of post notification date are to
be generally ignored unless the evidence is laid to show that there was
no increase in price despite such acquisition. In the case of Special Land
Acquisition Officer And Another (supra), the Court again held that the
Court has to compare the sale deeds when the sale instances are of small
( 61 ) FA-1574-2009 +
area of land and the area acquired is large piece of land. In the case of
Mehrawal Khewaji Trust and State of Maharashtra Vs. Santaram Mahadu
Pingle (supra), the Court considered the sale instances to be of smaller
area and had upheld the deductions while considering the compensation
for larger piece of land.
23. In the case of State of H.P. (supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court
considered the nature and role of the evidence of the expert witness and
the credibility of such witness. However, the said is in respect of the case
under Prevention of Corruption Act. This Court need not go into that
case. It is quite settled that expert witness must be an independent
witness.
24. In the case of Lal Chand (supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court
considered the utility and the relevance of undervalued sale deeds in
determining market price. It is held that such deeds need to be excluded
from the consideration being unreliable evidence. This judgment is
relied upon in view of the evidence of Mr. Bajrang Malu who has stated
in his evidence that in the sale deed the value shown was lesser than the
( 62 ) FA-1574-2009 +
market value. It is held that the Court cannot add fanciful ideas by
adding percentage to the value shown in the sale deeds to arrive at
realistic market value.
25. In the case of G.M.I.D.C. And Another (supra), the Division Bench
of this Court partly allowed the appeals and the cross objections by
enhancing the compensation to Rs. 1720/- per R instead of Rs. 1000/-
per R awarded by the learned Reference Court. The interest was
awarded from the date of registration of cross objections. The interest
was awarded under section 34 of the said Act from the date of
notification under section 4 of the said Act. The Division Bench in view
of the judgment in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva
Rangari, (2016) 4 ALLMR 513 held that the same can be awarded only
from the date of award. The cross objections were registered after nine
years of the award. It was considered that non filing of cross objections
suggested that the respondent/land owners were not having any
grievance about the adequacy of the compensation and in that view also
the interest was directed to be granted from the date of registration of
( 63 ) FA-1574-2009 +
cross objections.
26. In the case of Chimanlal Hargovinddas (supra), the Court laid
down the factors to be considered while considering the references
under section 18 of the said Act. It is considered that the Court has to
consider the references as original proceeding. The determination has to
be made as on the date of publication of notification under section 4 of
the said Act. The Court has to consider the most comparable sale
instance. The Court needs to consider the proximity from the time angle
as well as from the situation. In the case of Union of India Vs. Pramod
Gupta (supra), it is held that the Court also need to take into
consideration the enormity of the financial implication of enhancement
in view of size of the land acquired for the particular project. In the case
of Manilal Shamalbai Patel (supra), it is held that when the sale
instances are of small area and the land acquired is of larger area then
deductions are permissible. Judgments in the case of Radhey Sham and
Shubh Ram And Others (supra) are on similar lines.
27. Coming to the impugned judgment this Court finds that, the
( 64 ) FA-1574-2009 +
learned Trial Judge has considered the sale instances prior to the date of
issuance of notification under section 4 of the said Act. The highest sale
exemplar was Rs. 2,13,500/- per H for dry land. Considering the sale
instance was one year prior to the date of notification the learned
Reference Court has increased the value by 10% per year and considered
the value to be Rs. 2,34,850/- per H. Though the claimants had claimed
compensation of Rs. 12,00,000/- per Acre based upon the sale deed in
favour of Bajrang Malu it rightly considered the valuation based upon
the sale instances. The sale instance in the case of Bajrang Malu was for
a small area i.e. only for 20 R of land. Thus, considering overall evidence
the learned Reference Court determined the compensation at the rate of
Rs. 4,00,000/- per Acre for dry land, Rs. 6,00,000/- for semi irrigated
land and Rs. 8,00,000/- for irrigated land. So far as trees compensation
is concerned, the learned Reference Court has rightly accepted the report
at Exh. 27. So far as evidence of PW-5 is concerned, the Court has rightly
considered the same. So far as consideration of nature of the land, it
considered the evidence on record and has rightly observed that only in
L.A.R. No. 925/1999 the land was irrigated land. It is rightly held that
( 65 ) FA-1574-2009 +
the claimants in other cases have failed to prove their lands to be
irrigated or semi irrigated land. The judgments are rightly considered so
far as determining the rate of compensation.
28. So far as grant of interest under section 34 of the said Act is
concerned, the learned Trial Judge has held the the said interest needs
to be paid from the date of taking over of the possession. However, in
view of the judgment in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva
Rangari (supra), this Court holds that it is not permissible to grant
interest under section 34 of the said Act from the date of taking
possession when it is taken prior to the date of notification. The
claimants would be thus entitled to get the interest only from the date of
award. To that extent, the appeals filed by the acquiring body deserves
to be allowed by modifying the award. So far as rental compensation is
concerned, again this Court finds that, now it is settled that the
claimants will not be entitled to get any rental compensation. The award
needs to be modified to that extent as well. Considering above, following
order :
( 66 ) FA-1574-2009 +
ORDER
(I) The first appeals filed by the claimants are dismissed.
(II) The first appeals filed by the acquiring body are partly allowed.
The award stands modified only to the extent of interest under section
34 of the said Act. The same shall be paid from the date of award and
not from the date of taking over of the possession.
(III) The claimants shall not be entitled to receive rental compensation.
(IV) If the amount is not paid as per the award by the learned
Reference Court, the same be paid to the claimants within six (06)
months from today. If the amount is already deposited in the office of
this Court, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same from the
office of this Court.
(V) With this, the first appeals stand disposed off.
(VI) In view of above discussion, Cross Objection No. 19/2026 stands
disposed of.
( 67 ) FA-1574-2009 +
(VII) In view of disposal of first appeals, civil applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
(VIII) No order as to costs.
( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )
P.S.B.
Checking your session…