Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution

Bombay High Court

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusBALU MAHADU KORHALE

Decided: 2 July 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN

Holding

Compensation must be computed in accordance with paragraph 28 of the State of Maharashtra v. Chandrakant Mangilal Samdadia judgment, and the appeals are remanded to the Reference Court for such computation.

Summary

The High Court dealt with a series of appeals and cross‑objections concerning the valuation of land acquired for the Punegaon Dam under notifications of 1990 and 1991. Both the claimants and the State agreed that the matter should be decided in line with the Division Bench’s earlier order in State of Maharashtra v. Chandrakant Mangilal Samdadia, which directed the Reference Court to use the valuation method prescribed in paragraph 28 of that judgment. The Court held that the compensation must be computed based on the date of notification and the type of land as specified in that paragraph. Consequently, the appeals were partly allowed and the matters were remanded to the Reference Court to apply the prescribed valuation scheme. All related civil applications were disposed of, and the parties were directed to appear before the Reference Court with the relevant orders.

Issues considered

What method of valuation should be applied for compensation for land acquired under the 1990 and 1991 notifications?
Whether paragraph 28 of State of Maharashtra v. Chandrakant Mangilal Samdadia (2012) is binding on the Reference Court for computing compensation?
Whether the appeals and cross‑objections should be remanded for fresh computation or decided afresh?

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation
valuation
reference court
remand
paragraph 28
dam project

Judgment

HMK 24. FA-1181-2005 & Ors.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1181 OF 2005

Digitally Trimbak Khandu Sonawane ….Appellant
SAYYED signed
SAYYED
by
SAEED SAEED ALI
ALI AHMED ALI
AHMED Date:
2026.07.03
Versus
ALI 12:23:07
+0530

The State Of Maharashtra .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2172 OF 2006
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1183 OF 2005

Pundalik Mahadu Ghuge & Anr. ….Appellants

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. .…Respondents

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1182 OF 2005

Murlidhar Bhau Ghuge ….Appellant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. .…Respondents

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1184 OF 2005

Pandurang Suka Ghuge ….Appellant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 688 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1995 OF 2004

1 of 6
HMK 24. FA-1181-2005 & Ors.doc

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Pundalik Mahadu Ghuge & Ors. .…Respondents

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 686 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1993 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 30328 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Bhima Bhika Wagh & Ors. .…Respondents

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 684 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1991 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 30073 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Ramdas Trimbak Sonawane .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 681 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1988 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 30071 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Deoram Mahadu Palvi (Decd)
By Legal Heirs,
1a) Mandabai Deoram Palvi & Anr. .…Respondents

2 of 6
HMK 24. FA-1181-2005 & Ors.doc

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 683 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1990 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 30354 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Kaushalyabai Krishna Gaikwad .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 695 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2002 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Pandurang Suka Ghuge .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 692 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1999 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 30082 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Kumubai Jagannath Mahale & Ors. .…Respondents

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 693 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2000 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 32265 OF 2022

3 of 6
HMK 24. FA-1181-2005 & Ors.doc

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Pandurang Kushaba Pawar & Anr. .…Respondents

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 687 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1994 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Murlidhar Bhau Ghuge .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 682 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1989 OF 2004
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 30081 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Balu Mahadu Korhale .…Respondent

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 680 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1987 OF 2004

The State Of Maharashtra ….Appellant

Versus

Trimbak Khandu Sonawane .…Respondent
__________________________________________________________________

Mr. Anil Ahuja (through V. C.) a/w. Mrs. Bhavana Khemani for the Appellant
in FA/1181/2005, FA/2172/2006, FA/1183/2005, FA/1182/2005,
FA/1184/2005 & XOB(ST)/30082/2004 and for Respondent in

4 of 6
HMK 24. FA-1181-2005 & Ors.doc

FA/688/2004, XOB(ST)/30073/2004, FA/684/2004, FA/681/2004,
XBO(ST)/30071/2004, FA/695/2004, FA/692/2004, FA/693/2004,
XOB(ST)/32265/2022, FA/683/2004, FA/687/2004, FA/682/2004,
XOB(ST)/60081/2004 & FA/680/2004.
Mr. A. R. Patil, Additional G. P. for the Appellant-State in FA/688/2004,
FA/686/2004, FA/684/2004, FA/681/2004, FA/683/2004, FA/695/2004,
FA/692/2004, FA/693/2004, FA/687/2004, FA/682/2004, FA/680/2004
and for Respondent in FA/1181/2005, FA/2172/2006, FA/1183/2005,
FA/1182/2005 & FA/1184/2005.
Mr. Pramod N. Joshi for the Petitioner in XOB(ST)/30328/2004 &
XOB(ST)/30354/2004.
__________________________________________________________________

CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J.
DATED : 02nd JULY 2026

P. C. :

1. This group of Appeals and cross-objections are filed by the claimants
and the State with regard to the valuation of a land acquired under
Notifications dated 04th January, 1990 and 07th March, 1991 for
construction of Punegaon Dam.

2. Both the parties agreed that the issue raised in these Appeals and
cross-objections now stands concluded by the decision of the Division
Bench of this Court in the case of The State of Maharashtra & Anr. vs.
Chandrakant Mangilal Samdadia & Anr. 1 decided on 10th August, 2012.
The Division Bench in paragraph 28 has directed the Reference Court to
adopt value based on the date of Notification and type of the land and also
gave other directions.

3. In view of above, all these Appeals and cross-objections are
remanded back to the Reference Court to be decided in accordance with
paragraph 28 of the above order for the purpose of computation of
entitlement.
1 First Appeal No. 261 of 2007 & connected matters.

5 of 6
HMK 24. FA-1181-2005 & Ors.doc

4. All the Appeals and cross-objections are partly allowed.

5. The parties to appear before the Reference Court with the copy of the
present order and also with the copy of order passed by the Division Bench
in the case of The State of Maharashtra & Anr. vs. Chandrakant Mangilal
Samdadia & Anr. (Supra) on 27th July, 2026 at 11.00 am, so that, the
Tribunal can pass necessary consequential orders.

6. The order and award of the Reference Court stands modified in
above terms.

7. It is made clear that the Reference Court will compute the
compensation in accordance with paragraph 28 of the above order. It is
further clarified that both the parties are agreeable that every clause of
paragraph 28 would be applicable.

8. It is clarified that the phrase “remanded back” used in this order is
only for giving effect to paragraph 28 of the above order and should not be
understood for deciding the matter afresh.

9. Appeals and cross-objections are disposed of in above terms.

10. Consequently, Civil Applications filed in these proceedings do not
survive and are disposed of accordingly.

[ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ]

6 of 6

Continue reading with your account

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

Checking your session…