Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

BILKIS BEGUM W/O MOHAMMAD ABDUL KHUDUSversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

Disposal
PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

The Court held that the present appeals are covered by the earlier order in First Appeal No. 379 of 2010 and therefore must be disposed of in accordance with that order.

Summary

The appellants Bilkis Begum and Abdul Khudas Haji Abdul Rahim appealed against 2009 judgments awarding compensation for land acquired in Brahmapuri village for the Godavari River Action Plan. They argued that their cases were identical to those decided in First Appeal No. 379 of 2010, which had already fixed compensation rates. The State of Maharashtra and the acquiring body accepted this position. The Court examined the submissions and, finding the controversies identical, applied the earlier order to the present appeals. Consequently, the appeals were partly allowed, the 2009 awards were modified, a compensation rate of Rs 17,93,983 per hectare was fixed, the remaining awards were confirmed, and the appellants were ordered to pay deficit court fees.

Issues considered

  • Whether the present appeals are covered by the order dated 21‑07‑2026 in First Appeal No. 379 of 2010.
  • What compensation rate is applicable to the land acquired for the Godavari River Action Plan.

Subjects

  • land acquisition
  • compensation
  • public purpose
  • Godavari River Action Plan
  • appellate jurisdiction
  • modification of award
  • court fees

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:39528
                                                                         904-FA-676-2010.odt
                                                 1

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               904 FIRST APPEAL NO. 676 OF 2010

                            Bilkis Begum W/o Mohammad Abdul Khudus
                                              VERSUS
                                The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                                               ……

                                 FIRST APPEAL NO. 679 OF 2010

                                 Abdul Khudas Haji Abdul Rahim
                                             VERSUS
                               The State Of Maharashtra And Others

                                              ……
          Mr. G.N. Chincholkar, Advocate for the Appellants-claimants in Both FAs
          Mr. A.D. Wange, AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 in FA/676/2010
          Mr. S.N. Morampalle, AGP for Respondents NO.1 and 2 in FA/679/2010
          Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for the Respondent-Acquiring body
                                              ……

                                          CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                          DATE       : 29 AUGUST, 2026
          PER COURT :

          1.      Heard the learned counsel for both the sides.


          2.      These appeals arise out of the Judgments and Awards dated

          02.12.2009 passed by the learned 2 nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division,

          Nanded in Land Acquisition References Nos. 133 of 2001 and 134 of 2001,

          respectively.


          3.         Learned counsel Mr. Chincholkar for the appellants has tendered

          across the Bar a copy of the order dated 21.07.2026 passed by this Court in

          First Appeal No.379 of 2010. He submits that the land of the appellant was
                                                                904-FA-676-2010.odt
                                      2

acquired from the same village i.e. Brahmapuri, Taluka and District Nanded,

for the same public purpose i.e. Godavari River Action Plan and Water Filter

Center at Brahmapuri, and under the very same notification as involved in

the said appeal. It is, therefore, contended that the controversy involved in

the present appeal is squarely covered by the order dated 21.07.2026 passed

in First Appeal No.379 of 2010 and connected matters, and consequently,

the present appeals deserve to be disposed of in terms thereof. The learned

A.G.P. appearing for State as well as the learned counsel for the acquiring

body fairly concede the aforesaid position.


4.     Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel

for the respective parties and since the controversy involved in the present

appeals is admittedly covered by the order of this Court, I see no reason to

take a different view. The present appeals, therefore, deserve to be disposed

of in terms of the dated 21.07.2026 passed in First Appeal No.379 of 2010

and connected matters. Hence, the following order:


                                 ORDER

(I)    First Appeals are allowed partly.


(II)   Impugned judgments and awards dated 02.12.2009 passed by the

learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded in LAR Nos. 133 of

2009 and 134 of 2009 are modified
                                                                    904-FA-676-2010.odt
                                          3

(III)      The claimants are entitled to compensation at the rate of

Rs.17,93,983/- per Hectare (i.e. Rs. 17,939.83/- per R or Rs.16.66 per sq.

ft.) for acquired land.


(IV)       Rest of the awards passed by the Reference Court stands confirmed.


(V)        The appellants shall pay deficit court fees.


(VI)       Modified Awards be drawn.


(VII)      Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.




                                                [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
                                                          JUDGE
S P Rane


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.