Bombay High Court
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATURversusMADHUKAR SHRIRANG JADHAV AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANJAY A DESHMUKH
Holding
The claimants are entitled to compensation at Rs.45 per sq ft along with interest, solatium, and the award is modified accordingly.
Summary
The appellants challenged a judgment and award of the Land Reference Court concerning acquisition of their lands under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They argued that, like claimants in First Appeal No.1098 of 2018, they belong to Group No.I and should receive compensation at Rs.45 per square foot despite a few months’ difference in the notification dates. The acquiring body conceded this position. The Court held that the claimants are indeed entitled to the same compensation rate, and further ordered payment of interest under section 23(1‑A), solatium under section 23(2), and additional interest as per a prior decision. The impugned award was partially set aside and modified accordingly, with directions for payment and procedural matters.
Issues considered
- Whether claimants in Group No.I are entitled to the same compensation rate of Rs.45 per sq ft as awarded in earlier similar cases.
- Whether interest under section 23(1‑A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is payable on the compensation.
- Whether solatium under section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is payable.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 23(1-A), 23(2), 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- interest
- solatium
- Land Acquisition Act 1894
- group classification
- judicial review
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:16139
1 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
946 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1019 OF 2011
SAYYED IMRAL S/O IRSHAD HUSSAIN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 433 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
SAYYED AKBAR SAYYED JAKIRSAB AND OTHERS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 435 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
SAYED MOHSIN ABDUL FAIZSAB AND OTHERS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 428 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
SAYYED IRSHAD HUSSAIN ANSARI AND OTHERS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 430 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
HABIBABI SAYYED JAKIRSAAB AND OTHERS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1017 OF 2011
MADHUKAR S/O SHRIRANG JADHAV AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
2 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1014 OF 2011
SAYYED MOHASIN ABDUL FAIJSAB
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1015 OF 2011
HABIBABI W/O SAYYED JAKIRSAB AND OTHERS
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 432 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
MADHUKAR SHRIRANG JADHAV AND OTHERS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 436 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
SAYYED MAGDOOM RAJASAAB AND OTHERS
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1016 OF 2011
SAYYED MAGDUM RAJASAB
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 427 OF 2015
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR
VERSUS
SAYYED IMRAL IRSHAD HUSSAIN AND OTHERS
3 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1018 OF 2011
SAYYED AKBAR SAYYED JAKIRSAB
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Mr. Laxmikant C. Patil, Advocate for Claimants.
Ms. Anuradha S. Mantri, AGP for Respondent / State
Mr. S. G. Sangle, Advocate for Respondent / Acquiring Body.
...
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 10th April, 2026.
Per Court :
1 These appeals are preferred against the common
judgment and award dated 11th October, 2010, passed by the learned
Land Reference Court, Taluka Ahmedpur, District Latur, in LAR
Nos.289, 290, 291, 292, 48, 49 and 50 of 2007.
2 The learned Advocate for the claimants pointed out the
pleadings, the evidence, the grounds of objections in the appeals and
the reasons and findings in the impugned judgment and award.
3 The learned Advocate for the claimants pointed out the
judgment dated 16th March, 2026, passed by the Division Bench of this
Court in First Appeal No.1098 of 2018 and other connected matters,
and submitted that the lands in those appeals were acquired for one
4 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
and the same purpose, in which this Court awarded compensation to
the similarly situated claimants @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. He submitted
that, therefore, the present claimants are entitled to the same rate of
compensation. In the present appeals, the notification under Section 4
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the LA Act”) was issued
and published on 1st January, 2004. In First Appeal No.1098 of 2018
and other connected matters, the notifications under Section 4 of the
LA Act were issued and published on 3rd October, 2004, 7th July, 2006,
25th February, 2006, 7th July, 2006 and 3rd December, 2005 in Group
Nos.I to V, respectively. Admittedly, the present appeals fall under the
category of Group No.I. There is only some months’ difference of
issuance of notification under Section 4 of the LA Act. He, therefore,
prayed to award the same rate of compensation to the present
claimants.
4 Mr. Sangle, learned counsel for the acquiring body
conceded the said position of the decision in First Appeal No.1098 of
2018 (supra).
5 It is undisputed fact that the claimants’ lands in First
Appeal No.1098 of 2018 and other connected matters, are acquired for
one and the same purpose, in which this Court held that the claimants
are entitled to compensation @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. for Group No.I
5 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
category. It is not disputed that the present claimants’ lands are also
come in Group No.I category. There is only some months’ difference
of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the LA Act. Therefore,
the claimants are entitled to compensation @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. The
first appeals filed by the claimants and the acquiring body deserve to
be partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award deserves to be
partly set aside. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
I. The first appeals filed by the claimants and the acquiring
body are partly allowed.
II. The impugned judgment and award is partly set aside
and modified as under:-
(a) The claimants are entitled to the compensation @
Rs.45/- per sq. ft.
(b) Claimants be paid, in addition to aforesaid, an
amount calculated at the rate of 12% p.a. for the
period commencing from date of section 4
notification in respect of their acquired lands to the
date of award by Collector as provided under
section 23(1-A) of the LA Act.
(c) Claimants would also be paid solatium pursuant to
section 23(2) of the LA Act.
6 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
(d) Interest be paid on the compensation in
accordance with full bench judgment viz; 2016(3)
Mh.L.J. 457: MANU/MH/0557/2016, in the case of
“State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari”
from the date of award @ 9% p.a. for first year and
@ 15% p.a. for subsequent years till payment of
amount.
(e) It is made clear that the claimants shall not be
entitled to the amount of interest for the period of
delay caused in filing the first appeals, which are
condoned by this Court, on the said condition.
(f) The award amount was deposited by the acquiring
body either in the High Court or in the Trial Court
and the claimants were permitted to withdraw the
said amount. The claimants will be entitled to
withdraw the remaining amount along with accrued
interest.
(g) Acquiring Body shall deposit the amount of
compensation within six (6) months from the date
of uploading of this order.
(h) Bank Guarantee, if any, furnished by the Claimants
stands revoked.
(i) The claimants are required to pay the deficit court
fees, if any, on the enhanced amount of
7 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt
compensation. If the deficit court fee is not paid by
the claimants, then the same shall be
recovered/deducted from the enhanced
compensation amount.
(j) Pending civil applications, if any, are disposed of.
[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
nga
Checking your session…