Bombay High Court
SAYED AHMED SAYED QASIMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The appeal is partly allowed; compensation is increased to Rs.2,60,000 per hectare and interest is awarded under Sections 28 and 34.
Summary
The appellant's agricultural land was acquired in 2000 for a state highway under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The initial compensation of Rs.34,400 per acre was accepted under protest, and the claimant sought a higher market value, leading the Reference Court to enhance compensation to Rs.1,25,000 per hectare. The appellant argued that several recent sale transactions, including non‑agricultural plots, should be treated as comparable sales, contending that the Reference Court erred by relying on revenue assessments. The State countered that only agricultural sales are relevant. The High Court examined the sale instances, accepted a pre‑notification agricultural sale as comparable, applied a 10% escalation, and increased the compensation to Rs.2,60,000 per hectare, also granting interest under Sections 28 and 34, while confirming the remainder of the award.
Issues considered
- Whether sale transactions of non‑agricultural land can be used as comparable sales for determining market value of acquired agricultural land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether the Reference Court erred in basing the compensation primarily on land revenue assessment instead of comparable sales.
- Whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation under Sections 28 and 34 of the Act.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 11, 28, 34, 4(1)
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- market value determination
- comparable sales
- agricultural land
- interest under Sections 28 and 34
- valuation methodology
- appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40943
Dilwale 1 28-fa-632-10.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
28 FIRST APPEAL NO. 632 OF 2010
Sayed Ahmed Sayed Qasim
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
...
Advocate for Appellant : Adv. N. D. Kendre h/f Mr. Santosh C. Bhosle
AGP for Respondent-State: Mr. A. D. Wange
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 01.09.2026
PER COURT :
1. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 2000, the appeal is
heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective
parties.
2. By this appeal, the appellant-original claimant takes an exception
to the judgment and award dated 30.10.2009 passed by Joint Civil Judge
Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.12 of 2007, whereby the learned
Reference Court refused to enhance the compensation to the extent
claimed by claimant.
3. The land of the claimant adm. 42R from Gut No.399 was acquired
for the purpose of Bhokar Turn-Road Main State Highway No.2 from
Bhokar, Tahsil Bhokar Dist. Nanded. The notification under Section 4(1)
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) was published on
08.06.2000. Possession of the acquired land was taken in the year 2000.
Dilwale 2 28-fa-632-10.odt
The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award under Section 11 of the
Act on 29.04.2006 and determined the compensation at the rate of
Rs.34,400/- per acre i.e. Rs.86,000/- per H. The claimant accepted the
amount of compensation under protest and thereafter sought a reference
to the Collector for determination of the market value of the acquired
land. The claimant claimed compensation @ Rs.4,00,000/- per acre. The
learned Reference Court enhanced the same to Rs.1,25,000/- per H.
4. Mr. Kendre holding for Mr. Bhosle, learned counsel for the claimant
submits that the claimant produced several sale instances at Exhibits 15
to 20 from Taluka Bhokar, the details of which are as follows:
Sr No. Exhibit Date Area Consideration Market Value in per
No. sq. ft.
1 15 21.12.1994 1800 sq. ft. Rs.35,000/- Rs.19.44/-
2 16 05.02.1997 1380 sq. ft. Rs.17,000/- Rs.12.31/-
3 17 05.02.1997 1500 sq. ft. Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.66.66/-
4 18 13.12.1999 1200 sq. ft. Rs.50,000/- Rs.41.66/-
5 19 01.06.2006 75X1 sq. ft. Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.1333.33/-
6 20 30.03.2007 432 sq. ft. Rs.4,75,000/- Rs.1099.53/-
The learned counsel submits that learned Reference Court ought to
have treated these sale instances as comparable sale instances, but the
learned Reference Court erroneously relied upon award passed in LAR
No.62/1997 decided on 17.04.2006, wherein compensation @ Rs.5/- per
sq. ft. was granted i.e. Rs.2,17,800/- per acre.
5. He further submits that the learned Reference Court has
Dilwale 3 28-fa-632-10.odt
determined the market value substantially on the basis of land revenue
assessment and to that extent the approach adopted by learned Reference
Court cannot be sustained, and therefore, he prays to allow the appeal
filed by claimant by setting aside the impugned award.
6. Per contra, Mr. Wange, learned AGP for the State submits that the
acquired land was agricultural land whereas the sale instances relied
upon by the claimant were pertaining to non agricultural plots from
developed Taluka Bhokar. Thus, the same cannot be directly relied upon
for determination of market value of acquired agricultural land. Thus, he
submits that the compensation awarded by SLAO is appropriate and
prays to dismiss the appeal filed by claimant.
7. Having heard rival submissions of learned counsel and with their
assistance upon perusal of record and proceedings, it appears that the
SLAO has considered about 50 sale instances while passing the award
under Section 11, which is exhibited before the learned Reference Court
at Exhibit 6. The bare perusal of SLAO award depicts that two sale
instances at Sr. Nos.2 and 6 dated 12.01.1996 and 24.04.1996 were
considered by SLAO which fetched market value of Rs.2,00,000/-. The
said sale instances being from Taluka Bhokar and prior to Section 4
notification can be relied upon for determination of market value. Thus, I
am inclined to treat the said sale instances as comparable sale instances.
8. By the sale instance at Sr. No.2, land adm. 40 R from Gut no.412
was sold for Rs.80,000/- on 12.01.1996, which fetched market value of
Dilwale 4 28-fa-632-10.odt
Rs.2,00,000/-. As the said sale instance is four years prior to publication
of Section 4 notification, I am inclined to grant 10% escalation for three
years, which works out to Rs.2,60,000/- per H. Hence, I pass following
order.
ORDER
i) The First Appeal is partly allowed.
ii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to compensation @
Rs.2,60,000/- per H and to that extent impugned award
stands modified.
iii) The appellant/claimant shall be entitled to interest
under Sections 28 and 34 as per Full Bench judgment of
this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva
Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J.457.
iv) Rest of the award passed by the learned Reference Court
stands confirmed.
v) Modified Award be drawn accordingly.
vi) Deficit Court fees be paid.
vii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
Checking your session…