Bombay High Court
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABADversusMUKTESHWAR DHONDIBA SHETE AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The judgment and award are modified only with respect to interest; the compensation awarded remains unchanged.
Summary
The Executive Engineer (acquiring body) appealed the judgment and award dated 24 September 2013 of the 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, which had enhanced compensation for several land acquisition cases. The appellant argued that the enhanced compensation exceeded four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, but the State Government’s policy (Resolution Sankirna‑2014) indicated it would not challenge awards not exceeding that multiple. The court found no merit to alter the compensation quantum, accepting the State’s policy position. However, the court held that the reference court’s direction to pay interest from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, conflicted with the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari. Consequently, the court partially allowed the appeals, modifying the award only with respect to interest, directing that interest be calculated under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act in line with the cited precedent, while leaving the compensation unchanged.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation awarded by the reference court, which exceeds four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, should be altered in view of the State Government's policy.
- Whether the direction to pay interest from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is legally valid.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34, 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- interest
- reference court award
- government policy
- modification of judgment
- Sections 28 and 34
- Full Bench precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41795
FA 4029/17 & Ors.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
5 FIRST APPEAL NO. 4029 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
RANGNATH NARSOBA MULE DIED THR LRS DAGDU RANGNATH MULE AND
ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4039 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
SAJABAI YASHWANT SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4037 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
BHAGWAT DHONDIBA SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4028 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
MUNIR ISAK SINDH AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4031 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
PARMESHWAR BHAGWAT SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4030 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
RAM LAXMAN JADHAV AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4032 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
SUKUMARBAI GOROBA SHETE AND ORS
FA 4029/17 & Ors.
2
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4034 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
RAMESHWAR DHONDIBA SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4026 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
DAGDU BHAGWAT SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4024 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
MITHU ISAK SINDH AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4036 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
MUKTESHWAR DHONDIBA SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4035 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
KASHIBAI LAXMAN JADHAV AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4033 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
NAGNATH BASLING SHETE AND ORS
…
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4023 OF 2017
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.D. OSMANABAD THR GMIDC AURANGABAD
VERSUS
RAMESHWAR DHONDIBA SHETE AND ORS
…
Advocate for Appellants : Mr. Bhalerao Sudhir G.
FA 4029/17 & Ors.
3
AGP for Respondents: Mr. A.D. Wange
Advocate for Respondents/claimants : Mr. V.S. Tanwade
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : September 07, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. By these appeals, the appellant/acquiring body challenges the
judgment and award dated 24.09.2013 passed by the learned 4 th Jt. Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in LAR Nos. 26, 22, 25, 27, 30, 94, 34,
32, 31, 20, 24, 18, 21 of 2009 and 462 of 2010.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the compensation
enhanced by the learned Reference Court exceed slightly above four times
the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The learned AGP
appearing for the respondent-State fairly concedes the aforesaid position.
4. It is submitted that, having regard to the policy decision of the State
Government contained in Government Resolution No. Sankirna-2014/
Prak.Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4 dated 03.11.2016, as subsequently clarified by the
Corrigenda dated 23.02.2017 and 13.08.2018, the State Government has
taken a decision not to challenge an award of the Reference Court where
the compensation enhanced does not exceed four times the amount
awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and the policy decision of the
FA 4029/17 & Ors.
4
State Government along with other merits of matter, I do not find any
reason to interfere with the Judgment and Award insofar as the quantum of
compensation is concerned. However, as regards the award of interest, the
learned Reference Court has directed payment of interest from the date of
publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894. Such direction is contrary to the law laid down by the Full Bench of
this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari, reported in 2016
(3) Mh.L.J. 457. To that limited extent, the impugned Judgment and Award
requires modification. Hence, the following order is passed:
ORDER
(i) The First Appeals are partly allowed.
(ii) The judgment and award dated 24.09.2013 passed by the learned 4 th
Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in LAR Nos. 26, 22, 25, 27, 30,
94, 34, 32, 31, 20, 24, 18, 21 of 2009 and 462 of 2010, is modified to the
aforesaid extent.
(iii) The claimant shall be entitled to interest under Sections 28 and 34 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, strictly in accordance with the principles laid
down by the Full Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva
Rangari, reported in 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457.
(iv) Save and except the aforesaid modification in respect of interest, the
judgment and award dated 24.09.2013 passed by the learned 4 th Jt. Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in LAR Nos. 26, 22, 25, 27, 30, 94, 34,
32, 31, 20, 24, 18, 21 of 2009 and 462 of 2010 shall remain unaltered.
(v) The claimants are at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by the
acquiring body in this Court, together with the accrued interest thereon,
subject to adjustment of the amount of interest, if any, payable under
FA 4029/17 & Ors.
5
Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as determined in
accordance with law. After such adjustment, the claimant shall be entitled
to withdraw the balance amount, and any amount remaining thereafter shall
be at liberty to be retained by the acquiring body.
(vi) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…