Bombay High Court
M.S.E.B. THR.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JALGAONversusKAMALABAI ANADA PAWAR AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANJAY A DESHMUKH
Holding
The appeals are dismissed as they lack merit; the compensation awarded by the Land Reference Court is proper.
Summary
The Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) appealed the compensation awards granted by the Land Reference Court, Jalgaon, in four separate land‑acquisition cases involving individual agriculturist claimants. The appellants contended that the compensation was improperly calculated and excessively high, alleging mis‑appreciation of evidence. The State of Maharashtra and the claimants argued that the Reference Court correctly determined market value in accordance with Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, relying on a valuation report and sale exemplars. The High Court examined the pleadings, evidence, and the Reference Court’s reasoning, finding that the market‑value assessment was proper and the objections lacked merit. Consequently, the Court dismissed all four appeals without costs, affirming the compensation awards.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation awarded by the Land Reference Court is excessive or improperly determined.
- Whether the market value of the acquired land and houses was correctly assessed under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether the evidence, including the valuation report, was duly appreciated by the Reference Court.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- valuation
- market value
- electricity board
- appeal dismissed
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:9223
903-fa-496-2002+
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 496 OF 2002
Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Through the Executive Engineer M.S.E.B.
Jalgaon.
…..PETITIONER
(interested party)
VERSUS
1. Parwatibai Vedu Pawar,
Age: 57 years, Occupation: Agriculturist,
R/o Nimbhora, Bk, Tal: Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon.
…..CLAIMANT
2. The State of Maharashtra,
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
U.P.T.H. Hatnur, Jalgaon.
…..RESPONDENTS
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. A. M. Gaikwad, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. Virendra V. Jahagirdar, AGP for Respondents-State
Mr. K. G. Narwade h/f Mr. A. B. Kale, Advocate for Respondent no.1
_____________________________________________________________
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 497 OF 2002
Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Through the Executive Engineer M.S.E.B.
Jalgaon.
…..PETITIONER
(interested party)
VERSUS
1. Sadu Suka Pawar
Age: 50 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
R/o Nimbhora, Bk, Tal: Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon.
(Appeal abated as against respondent no.1
vide Court order dated 26.08.2003)
…..CLAIMANT
2. The State of Maharashtra,
903-fa-496-2002+
-2-
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
U.P.T.H. Hatnur, Jalgaon.
…..RESPONDENTS
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. A. M. Gaikwad, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. Virendra V. Jahagirdar, AGP for Respondents-State
Mr. K. G. Narwade h/f Mr. A. B. Kale, Advocate for Respondent no.1
_____________________________________________________________
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 498 OF 2002
Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Through the Executive Engineer M.S.E.B.
Jalgaon.
…..PETITIONER
(interested party)
VERSUS
1. Mathurabai Lahanu Pawar,
Age: 45 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
R/o Nimbhora, Bk, Tal: Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon.
…..CLAIMANT
2. The State of Maharashtra,
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
U.P.T.H. Hatnur, Jalgaon.
…..RESPONDENTS
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. A. M. Gaikwad, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. Virendra V. Jahagirdar, AGP for Respondents-State
Mr. K. G. Narwade h/f Mr. A. B. Kale, Advocate for Respondent no.1
_____________________________________________________________
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 499 OF 2002
Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Through the Executive Engineer M.S.E.B.
Jalgaon.
…..PETITIONER
(interested party)
VERSUS
903-fa-496-2002+
-3-
1. Kamalabai Ananda Pawar
Age: 25 years, Occupation: Agriculturist.
R/o Nimbhora, Bk, Tal: Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon.
(Appeal dismissed as against respondent no.1
vide Court order dated 26.08.2003)
…..CLAIMANT
2. The State of Maharashtra,
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
U.P.T.H. Hatnur, Jalgaon.
…..RESPONDENTS
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. A. M. Gaikwad, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. Virendra V. Jahagirdar, AGP for Respondents-State
Mr. K. G. Narwade h/f Mr. A. B. Kale, Advocate for Respondent no.1
_____________________________________________________________
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2026
ORDER :-
1. All these appeals are preferred against the judgments and
awards passed by the learned Land Reference Court, Jalgaon, as per
the following chart:-
Sr. No. First Appeal No. L.A.R. No. Date of judgment
1 496 of 2002 187 of 1993 21.04.1998
1 497 of 2002 202 of 1993 21.04.1998
1 498 of 2002 204 of 1993 21.04.1998
1 499 of 2002 136 of 1993 21.04.1998
2. The learned advocate for the appellants, in the respective
appeals, submitted that the amount of compensation is not properly
determined by the learned Reference Court and exorbitant amount of
903-fa-496-2002+
-4-
compensation is awarded. The evidence was not properly appreciated
and therefore, interference is warranted in the impugned judgments
and awards.
3. The learned A.G.P. for the respondent-State and advocate
for the respondents-claimants strongly opposed the appeals and
submitted that there is no substance in the grounds of objections
raised in the appeals. It is submitted that the learned Reference Court
has rightly determined the amount of compensation as per the market
value of the acquired lands as per the notification issued/published
under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, dated 19.09.1996.
There is no substance in the grounds of objections raised in the
appeals. The appeals therefore, deserve to be dismissed. It is lastly
prayed to dismiss the appeals.
4. Perused the pleadings, evidence, grounds of objections in
the appeals and the reasons and findings in the impugnment
judgments and award of the learned Reference Court. The learned
Reference Court determined the market value of the acquired houses
by considering the sale exemplar Exh.29 and the valuation report. The
valuer Prakash Baser has deposed before the learned Reference Court
and also proved the valuer’s report at Exh.20. The learned Reference
Court has rightly evaluated the evidence and came to the right
conclusion. Furthermore, it is pointed out that in similarly situated
903-fa-496-2002+
-5-
case i.e. first appeal No. 573 of 1998 and other connected appeals, it
was submitted on behalf of the learned advocate for the appellants,
Mr. H.T. Joshi, for the appellants therein to withdraw those appeals.
The withdrawal was allowed and the appeals were disposed of on
04.04.2007. On this count also, this Court finds that there is no
substance in the grounds of objections of appeals and the appeals
therefore, disposed of as sans merit. The appeals are dismissed with
no order as to costs.
(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)
Rushikesh/2026
Checking your session…