BANDA VISHWANATH JAGTAP.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

                                                       955-fa-486-2003
                                 -1-

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 486 OF 2003

       Banda s/o Vishwanath Jagtap,
       Deceased thr. L.Rs.
                                                     (Orig. Claimant)
1.     Sheshrao s/o Banda Jagtap,
       Age: 65 years, Occ: Agri.
       R/o Bhatangali, Tq. Lohara, Dist. Osmanabad

2.     Sindhubai Raosaheb Bhosale
       Deceased thr. L.Rs.

2.1.   Dilip Raosaheb Bhosale,
       Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture,
       Address: Near Mahadev Temple,
       Chhatrapati Chowk, Rampur,
       Tq. Omerga, Dist. Dharashiv (Osmanabad).

2.2.   Vijayabai Tanaji Survase,
       Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture,
       Address: Bahali, Tq. Lohara, Dist. Dharashiv (Osmanabad)

2.3.   Jayabai Vikas Kavthe,
       Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture,
       Address: Nalwadi, Tq. Omerga,
       District: Dharashiv (Osmanabad)

2.4.   Gopal Raosaheb Bhosale,
       Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture,
       Address: Near Mahadev Temple,
       Chhatrapati Chowk, Rampur,
       Tq. Omerga, Dist. Dharashiv (Osmanabad)

3.     Mohan s/o Banda Jagtap,
       Age: 55 years, Occ: Agriculture,
       R/o Bhatangali, Tq. Lohara, Dist. Osmanabad
                                                     …..APPELLANTS

            VERSUS
                                                      955-fa-486-2003
                                  -2-

      The State of Maharashtra,
      Through the Collector, Osmanabad.
                                             …..RESPONDENT
                                            (Orig. Respondent)
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. B. N. Patil, Advocate for Appellants
Mr. D. J. Patil, AGP for Respondent-State
_____________________________________________________________

                     CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                     DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2026

ORDER:-

.     This appeal is preferred against the judgment and award passed

by the learned Land Reference Court, Osmanabad in Land Acquisition

Reference No.58 of 1987 dated 25.01.1991.

2.    Claimant’s land bearing block no.13/4, admeasuring 0.53R and

block no.18/2, admeasuring 2.59 R of village Omerga, now Loha was

acquired for the purpose of Lower Terna Project by the notification

issued and published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,

1894 dated 20.01.1983. The final award was passed on 19.09.1986

awarding compensation @Rs.4400/- per acre i.e.Rs.110/- per Are.

Against the said award, claimant has preferred a reference and

learned Reference Court enhanced the amount and awarded

Rs.8,000/- per acre i.e. Rs.200/- per Are.

3.    Learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that very

meager amount of compensation was awarded. The evidence was not

properly appreciated. He is relying upon the judgment of this Court
                                                       955-fa-486-2003
                                   -3-

delivered in First Appeal No.176 of 2004, dated 04.12.2015 , by which

compensation @Rs.25,000/- per acre was awarded. He therefore

submitted that land in the said proceeding was acquired for one and

the same project and from one and the same village Bhatangali Tahsil

Omerga, now Loha, Dist. Osmanabad. He prayed that compensation

be paid on the basis of parity.

4.    Learned AGP for the state strongly opposed the appeal and

submitted that principle of parity cannot be applied in the present

matter.

5.    Upon perusal of the impugned judgment and judgment of this

Court delivered in 176 of 2004, in which the land from the same

village was acquired which is also a dry land like claimants’ land and

this Court awarded Rs.25,000/- per acre for that land. Relying upon

the judgment delivered by this Court claimants are certainly entitled

to the compensation @Rs.25,000/- per acre for dry land on the

principle of parity. The appeal deserves to be allowed. Impugned

judgment and award deserves to be set aside partly. Hence, the

following order:

                                  ORDER

      a.    First Appeal is allowed.

      b.    Impugned judgment and award is set aside and

      modified as under:
                                                               955-fa-486-2003
                                       -4-

        i.       Claimant   is   entitled    for   the   compensation

        @Rs.25,000/- per acre for their acquired dry land

        including earlier amount of compensation received by

        them with all the statutory benefits like additional

        component, interest and solatium as per the Land

        Acquisition Act, 1894.

        c.          Respondent-Acquiring Authority is directed to
        deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with
        accrued interest in this Court within 12 weeks.

        d.          On depositing the enhanced amount of
        compensation and upon payment of deficit Court fees,
        compensation be paid to the claimants accordingly.

        e.          It is clarified that the claimants are not
        entitled to the statutory benefits for the period of delay,
        if any, condoned by this Court.

        f.          Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand
        disposed of.



                                                   (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)

Rushikesh/2026