Bombay High Court
THE STAE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusKISHAN RAMRAO BIRADAR
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANJAY A DESHMUKH
Holding
The Reference Court’s award of compensation, including the 10% escalation, is lawful and cannot be disturbed.
Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted compensation for agricultural lands acquired for a minor irrigation tank at Sukni village. The State contended that the compensation rates of Rs.3100 per R for non‑irrigated land and Rs.4650 per R for irrigated land were excessive and not reflective of market value, alleging misappreciation of sale exemplars. The claimants argued that the award correctly incorporated a 10% escalation based on comparable sale exemplars executed before the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court examined the exhibits and found that the Reference Court had properly relied on the sale exemplars and lawfully applied the 10% increase. Concluding that the Reference Court’s findings were legal and correct, the Court dismissed all the appeals without costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation awarded by the Land Reference Court was excessive and not based on market value.
- Whether the Reference Court correctly applied a 10% escalation in compensation using sale exemplars predating the Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether the valuation of irrigated versus non‑irrigated agricultural land was proper.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- valuation
- escalation
- sale exemplars
- agricultural land
- minor irrigation tank
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:9870
1
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
FIRST APPEAL NO. 624 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Shankar s/o. Kishanrao Biradar,
Age-58 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 633 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
1. Hansraj s/o. Pandurang Biradar,
Age 21 years,
2. Narsing s/o. Pandurang Biradar,
Age 21 years,
Both Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondents
(Ori. Claimants)
2
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 623 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Dnyanoba s/o. Sayduram Biradar,
Age 60 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 627 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Saiduram s/o. Bapurao Biradar,
Age 65 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 620 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
3
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Suresh s/o. Pundlik Deokare,
Age 30 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 619 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Kishanrao s/o. Govindrao Telange,
Age 75 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 625 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Pandhari s/o. Ramchandra Kirwade,
Age 27 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
4
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 621 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Madhav s/o. Shivram Darshane,
Age 45 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 626 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
1. Shankar s/o. Kishanrao Biradar,
Age 30 years,
2. Gorakh s/o. Kishanrao Biradar,
Age 40 years,
Both Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondents
(Ori. Claimants)
5
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 632 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Gunda s/o. Sadba Telange,
Age - Major, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 622 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Kisan s/o. Saiduram Biradar,
Age 45 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 629 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
6
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Ashok s/o. Hiraji Deokare,
Age - Major, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 628 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Kishan s/o. Ramrao Biradar,
Age 60 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 618 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Pandurang s/o. Nivrutti Biradar,
Age 40 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
7
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 630 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Kerba s/o. Shivram [Died],
Narsing s/o Kerba Darahane,
Age 35 years, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 631 OF 2014
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Collector,
Collectorate, Latur.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Latur. … Appellants
(Orig. Respondents)
Versus
Prabhu s/o. Rama Mule,
Age-Major, Occup. Agriculture,
R/o. Kini [Yelladevi], Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. … Respondent
(Ori. Claimant)
…
Mr. D. J. Patil, AGP for Appellants / State.
Mr. H. B. Nandagavale, Advocate for the Claimants.
…
8
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 06th February, 2026.
ORAL JUDGMENT:
1 These appeals are preferred by the State Government
against the common judgment and award dated 18 th December, 2007,
passed by the learned Land Reference Court, District Latur, in Land
Acquisition References, as per the following chart:-
Sr. No. Appeal No. LAR No.
1 FIRST APPEAL NO. 624 OF 2014 LAR No.3197 of 2001
2 FIRST APPEAL NO. 633 OF 2014 LAR No.3209 of 2001
3 FIRST APPEAL NO. 623 OF 2014 LAR No.3213 of 2001
4 FIRST APPEAL NO. 627 OF 2014 LAR No.3244 of 2001
5 FIRST APPEAL NO. 620 OF 2014 LAR No.3205 of 2001
6 FIRST APPEAL NO. 619 OF 2014 LAR No.3181 of 2001
7 FIRST APPEAL NO. 625 OF 2014 LAR No.3182 of 2001
8 FIRST APPEAL NO. 621 OF 2014 LAR No.3245 of 2001
9 FIRST APPEAL NO. 626 OF 2014 LAR No.3206 of 2001
10 FIRST APPEAL NO. 632 OF 2014 LAR No.3207 of 2001
11 FIRST APPEAL NO. 622 OF 2014 LAR No.3208 of 2001
12 FIRST APPEAL NO. 629 OF 2014 LAR No.3180 of 2001
13 FIRST APPEAL NO. 628 OF 2014 LAR No.3176 of 2001
14 FIRST APPEAL NO. 618 OF 2014 LAR No.3177 of 2001
15 FIRST APPEAL NO. 630 OF 2014 LAR No.3178 of 2001
16 FIRST APPEAL NO. 631 OF 2014 LAR No.3179 of 2001
9
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
2 The learned AGP for the appellants pointed out that the
agricultural lands of these claimants were acquired by the State for
the purpose of construction of Minor Irrigation Tank at village Sukni,
Tahsil Udgir, District Latur. He further pointed out the pleadings,
evidence and reasons and findings of the learned Reference Court in
impugned judgment and award. He submitted that exorbitant amount
of compensation is awarded. From paragraph No.20 onwards of the
impugned judgment, it is pointed out that sale exemplars at Exhibits –
34 and 35 are improperly appreciated by the learned Reference
Court. The compensation was awarded @ Rs.3100/- per R for non-
irrigated lands and Rs.4650/- per R for irrigated lands, which is not the
real market value of the acquired lands. He submitted that the
impugned judgment and award are illegal, incorrect and requires
interference. He prayed to allow these appeals.
3 The learned counsel for the claimants strongly opposed
the appeals and pointed out the sale exemplars at Exhibits – 34 and
35 and submitted that the notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “said Act”) was published on 12 th
January, 1989, and both the sale exemplars were executed one year
prior to the said notification. Therefore, the learned Reference Court
had rightly increased 10% compensation for escalation of value of the
10
948 First Appeal 624 of 2024 ORS-Group.odt
property. There is absolutely no illegality and perversity in the
impugned judgment and award. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss
these appeals.
4 Perused the impugned judgment, the evidence, the
grounds of objections in the appeals and the reasons and findings of
the learned Reference Court.
5 On perusal of the sale exemplars at Exhibits – 34 and 35,
alongwith the reasons in paragraphs No.20 and onwards of the
impugned judgment and award, it appears that the learned Reference
Court has rightly relied upon the sale exemplars at Exhibits – 34 and
35 and held that those were comparable sale exemplars. The learned
Reference Court has rightly awarded 10% increase of compensation
for escalation in the value of the property.
6 The reasons and findings recorded by the learned
Reference Court are legal and correct and no interference is
warranted in it. There is no substance in the grounds of objections in
these appeals. The appeals deserve to be dismissed. All the first
appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.
[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
nga
Checking your session…