Bombay High Court
AMBADAS VISHWANATH JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAH and ANR.
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The Court held that the appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,000 per R for dry land, modifying the reference court's award.
Summary
The appellants' lands were acquired by the State for the Upper Manjra Project and initially awarded compensation of Rs.250‑330 per R under the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The reference court later enhanced the award to Rs.642 per R, which the appellants contested, arguing that a prior order (LAR No.35/1998) on the same project granted Rs.1,000 per R for dry land and was not challenged. The State argued that the earlier order was contrary to sale instances and that the reference court correctly fixed the compensation. The High Court examined the sale instances and found that the earlier order was applicable, concluding there was no justification for a lower amount. Consequently, the Court partly allowed the appeals, fixing compensation at Rs.1,000 per R and granting all statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, while leaving the remainder of the award unchanged.
Issues considered
- Whether the reference court erred in fixing compensation at Rs.642 per R when an earlier order on the same project awarded Rs.1,000 per R for dry land.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the enhanced compensation.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- statutory benefits
- Upper Manjra Project
- appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:27610
FA 447/07 & Ors.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
57 FIRST APPEAL NO. 447 OF 2007
AMBADAS VISHWANATH JADHAV
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR.
...
Advocate for Appellant : Mrs. A.D. Rakh
AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. B.A. Shinde
...
58 FIRST APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2007
DATTATRAYA RANGNATH JADHAV L.RS. BABRUWAN DATTATRAYA JADHAV
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR.
...
Advocate for Appellant : Mrs. A.D. Rakh
AGP for Respondent/State: Mrs. A.S. Mantri
…
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2155 OF 2009
FAKKAD BALAJI SATPUTE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAH. AND ANR.
...
Advocate for Appellant : Mrs. A.D. Rakh
AGP for Respondent/State: Mrs. A.S. Mantri
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : July 07, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned counsel for respective parties.
2. First Appeal No. 2155/2009 is not not board. Taken on board.
3. Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 24.11.2004 passed by
the VI Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed in LAR Nos. 254/1997,
255/1997 and 258/1997 the appellants/original claimants preferred the
present appeals for enhancement whereby the reference court enhanced
the compensation of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 642/- per R. as
FA 447/07 & Ors.
2
against the rate granted by Special Land Acquisition Officer at the rate of
Rs. 250/- to 330/- per R.
4. The lands of the claimants were acquired by the State for Upper
Manjra Project (Dokewadi Project). Notification under section 4 was
published on 30.7.1992. Notification under section 6 was published on
27.8.1993. The possession of the acquired lands was taken by the
Government on 1.3.1988 and the award was passed by the Special Land
Acquisition Act (SLAO) on 12.10.1995. Claimants accepted the amount
under protest and preferred the above references. Being aggrieved by the
judgment and award of the reference court, they prefer present appeals.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that from
the same notification and from the same project the reference court has
enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.1000/- per R. for dry land in
LAR No. 35/1998 and other connected matters on 3.2.2005 and as per her
submission, the said order was not challenged by the State or acquiring
body. Therefore, she submits that therefore there was no reason for the
reference court to reduce the compensation in present appeals. She
therefore, prays to allow the appeals.
6. The learned AGP for the State strongly opposed the aforesaid
averments by contending that infact the order passed in those LARs is
contrary to the sale instances and in the present matters comparable sale
instances were considered by the reference court and has rightly granted
compensation.
7. Though served, none appears for respondent No. 2.
8. I have considered the rival submissions, paper book, copy of order in
LAR No. 35/1998. I have also gone through the sale instances which were
FA 447/07 & Ors.
3
considered in the present matters. I find that same sale instances below
Exhs. 16 and 17 were considered by the reference court in LAR No.
35/1998 and other connected matters and has granted compensation at
the rate of Rs.1000/- per R. There was no justification for the reference
court to grant less amount in the present matter. Therefore, considering
the above, I am inclined to allow the appeals partly and proceed to pass
the following order.
ORDER
(I) The appeals are partly allowed.
(II) The appellants/claimants are entitled to receive an amount of
Rs.1000/- per R. for dry land.
(III) The appellants/claimant shall be entitled to all consequential
statutory benefits under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
on the enhanced compensation.
(IV) The impugned judgment and order of the reference court is modified
to that extent.
(V) Rest of the award is maintained.
(VI) Civil Applications, if any, stands disposed of.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…