Bombay High Court
BHAMABAI SAMBHA KOTE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The Court partially allowed the appeals for semi‑irrigated lands, enhancing compensation to Rs 1,50,000 per hectare, and dismissed the appeals for dry lands.
Summary
The claimants' lands in Dhavali village were acquired for a percolation tank and the Special Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed market values of Rs 48,000‑53,000 per hectare. Dissatisfied, the claimants sought a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the Reference Court raised the value to Rs 1,00,000 per hectare treating all lands as dry. The claimants argued that sale comparables and valuer reports justified a higher rate, especially for lands with wells and pipelines, and appealed for further enhancement. The High Court examined the classification of the lands, finding that some parcels were semi‑irrigated and should attract a 1.5‑times multiplier, resulting in a value of Rs 1,50,000 per hectare, while others remained dry at Rs 1,00,000. Accordingly, the Court partly allowed the appeals concerning semi‑irrigated lands, dismissed the others, modified the award, and ordered interest and statutory benefits as per the Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the market value of the acquired lands should be enhanced beyond the Reference Court's award of Rs 1,00,000 per hectare
- Whether the lands in question are to be classified as dry or semi‑irrigated for compensation purposes
- Whether the sale comparables and valuer reports cited by the claimants are relevant for determining market value
- Whether interest and statutory benefits under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are applicable
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 11, 18, 28, 34, 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- market value determination
- dry land
- semi‑irrigated land
- Section 18 reference
- interest under Section 28
- statutory benefits
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43294
9-FA-436-2014.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
9 FIRST APPEAL NO. 436 OF 2014
Ram Chandar Kote
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 442 OF 2014
Rukminbai Nagnath Kote (Died)
Through L.Rs. Padminbai Nagnath Kote And Ors
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 443 OF 2014
Bhamabai Sambha Kote And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 441 OF 2014
Chandrakant Trambak Kote
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 439 OF 2014
Subhash Chandar Kote
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 438 OF 2014
Nagnath Chandar Kote (Died)
Through L.Rs. Padminbai Nagnath Kote And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
9-FA-436-2014.odt
2
……
Mr. G.K. Sontakke, Advocate for Appellants-Claimants
Mr. D.R.Korde, AGP for Responden No.1-State
……
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned counsel Mr. G.K. Sontakke, for the Appellants-
Claimants and the learned AGP for Respondent No.1-State. Though served,
none appears for Respondent Nos.2 and 3-Acquiring Body.
2. These appeals, filed by the claimants, take exception to the common
Judgment and Award dated 30.03.2010 passed by the learned Extra Joint
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur, in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.126 of
2004, 124 of 2004, 122 of 2004, 129 of 2004, 123 of 2004 and 128 of 2004.
By the impugned Judgment and Award, the learned Reference Court partly
allowed the References under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(for short, “the Act”) and enhanced the compensation along with the
statutory benefits. However, as the compensation claimed by the claimants
was not granted in its entirety, the present appeals are filed seeking further
enhancement.
3. The lands belonging to the respective claimants, situated at village
Dhavali, Taluka Renapur, District Latur, were acquired for the Dhavali
Percolation Tank at village Dhavali. The particulars of the acquired lands are
as under:
9-FA-436-2014.odt
3
Sr. No. LAR No. Survey/Gat No. Area Acquired
1. 126 of 2004 189 26 R
2. 124 of 2004 192 39 R
3. 122 of 2004 194 92 R
4. 129 of 2004 193 53 R
5. 123 of 2004 190 45 R
6. 128 of 2004 191 5R
4. The notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on
17.02.2000. Thereafter, the Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short, “the
SLOA”) passed an Award under Section 11 of the Act on 30.10.2001. The
SLOA determined the market value of the acquired lands at the rate of
Rs.48,000/- per Hectare and Rs.53,000/- per Hectare by classifying the
lands into two groups, namely, dry and irrigated lands. Being dissatisfied
with the market value determined by the SLOA, the claimants accepted the
compensation under protest and sought reference under Section 18 of the
Act. Accordingly, the References were made to the learned Reference Court.
5. Before the learned Reference Court, the claimants relied upon the
sale instances at Exhibits 22 and 23 and contended that the market value
determined by the SLOA was inadequate. The learned Reference Court, after
considering the evidence on record, partly allowed the References and
determined the market value at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare by
treating the acquired lands as dry lands. Being dissatisfied with the amount
so determined, the claimants have preferred the present appeals seeking
further enhancement.
9-FA-436-2014.odt
4
6. Learned counsel Mr. G.K. Sontakke, for the Appellants-Claimants,
submits that the claimants had relied upon the Valuer's Report at Exhibit 33,
prepared by Mr. K.R. Pawar, and another Valuer's Report at Exhibit 34,
prepared by Mr. Anil Phulari. He submits that the claimants had also relied
upon the sale instance at Exhibit 22 dated 30.12.1996 from village
Shivankhed, under which land admeasuring 1 Hectare was sold for
consideration of Rs.2,75,000/-. According to him, by applying 10%
escalation for three years, the rate works out to Rs.1,43,000/- per Acre. He
further submits that the claimants relied upon the sale instance at Exhibit 23
dated 02.04.1997 from village Janwal, under which 42 R land was sold for
consideration of Rs.1,25,000/-. By applying 10% escalation for three years,
according to the learned counsel, the rate works out to Rs.1,54,714/- per
Acre. It is submitted that the learned Reference Court has not properly
considered the aforesaid Valuer's Reports and sale instances and has,
therefore, granted inadequate compensation. He, therefore, seeks further
enhancement.
7. Learned AGP Mr. D.R. Korde, appearing for Respondent No.1-State,
supports the impugned Judgment and Award. He submits that the learned
Reference Court has rightly determined the market value of the acquired
lands. He submits that the sale instances at Exhibits 22 and 23 relate to
lands situated at village Shivankhed and village Janwal respectively and that
both the villages are more than 5 Kms. away from the acquired lands. He
9-FA-436-2014.odt
5
submits that after considering the material on record, the learned Reference
Court has already enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare
and there is no basis for granting any further enhancement. He, therefore,
prays for dismissal of the appeals.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and, with
their able assistance, have gone through the record and proceedings. I have
also considered the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the learned
Reference Court, the Award passed by the SLOA and the material concerning
the sale instances relied upon by the claimants.
9. The on record shows that the sale instances relied upon by the
claimants at Exhibits 22 and 23 are from different villages. The learned
Reference Court has, however, taken them into consideration and has
determined the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare by treating the
acquired lands as dry lands.
10. The Award passed by the SLOA shows that, in respect of LAR
Nos.126 of 2004, 122 of 2004, 123 of 2004 and 128 of 2004, the existence
of a well and pipelines has been recorded in the acquired lands. In view of
such material, the lands involved in First Appeal Nos.436 of 2014, 443 of
2014, 439 of 2014 and 438 of 2014 are required to be considered as semi-
irrigated lands. On the other hand, in LAR Nos.124 of 2004 and 129 of
2004, corresponding to First Appeal Nos.442 of 2014 and 441 of 2014, there
9-FA-436-2014.odt
6
is no such reference to the existence of a well or pipeline in the Award.
Those lands, therefore, are to be treated as dry lands.
11. The learned Reference Court has determined the market value of the
dry lands at Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare. Having regard to the classification of
the lands referred to above, the lands involved in First Appeal Nos.436 of
2014, 443 of 2014, 439 of 2014 and 438 of 2014 are required to be treated
as semi-irrigated lands. By applying the ratio of 1.5 to the rate of
Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare, the market value of those lands would work out
to Rs.1,50,000/- per Hectare.
12. As regards First Appeal Nos.441 of 2014 and 442 of 2014, the
acquired lands are to be treated as dry lands and, therefore, the rate of
Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare determined by the learned Reference Court does
not call for any further enhancement.
13. Thus, the appeals arising out of LAR Nos.126 of 2004, 122 of 2004,
123 of 2004 and 128 of 2004 deserve to be partly allowed to the aforesaid
extent, whereas First Appeal Nos.441 of 2014 and 442 of 2014 deserve to be
dismissed. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) First Appeal Nos.441 of 2014 and 442 of 2014 are dismissed.
(ii) First Appeal Nos.436 of 2014, 443 of 2014, 439 of 2014 and 438 of
2014 are partly allowed.
9-FA-436-2014.odt
7
(iii) The common Judgment and Award dated 30.03.2010 passed by the
learned Extra Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur, is modified to the
extent of Land Acquisition Reference Nos.126 of 2004, 122 of 2004, 123 of
2004 and 128 of 2004.
(iv) The market value of the acquired semi-irrigated lands involved in the
aforesaid References is determined at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per Hectare.
(v) The Appellants-Claimants shall be entitled to all consequential
statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation in accordance with the
provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
(vi) The Appellants-Claimants shall be entitled to interest under Sections
28 and 34 of the Act strictly in accordance with the Full Bench decision in
State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457.
(vii) The Appellants-Claimants shall pay the deficit court fees.
(viii) Save and except the above modification in the quantum of
compensation, the common Judgment and Award dated 30.03.2010 passed
by the learned Extra Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur, in the
aforesaid Land Acquisition References shall remain unaltered.
(x) Modified award be drawn accordingly.
(xi) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
S P Rane
Checking your session…