Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORSversusPRAKASH ABASAHEB KHARAT AND ANR

Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The reference court correctly determined the market value of the acquired land and the enhancement of compensation is upheld.

Summary

The State of Maharashtra acquired 30 R of land in Takle Pokhari village for a percolation tank, issuing a Section 4 notification in 2005. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs 710 per R for dry land, but the reference court enhanced the compensation to Rs 3,000 per R, treating the land as seasonally irrigated and relying on a prior judgment (LAR No. 901/2010) from the same notification and village. The State appealed, contending that the enhancement was erroneous and that the earlier case was not binding precedent. The Court examined the record, noted that the earlier judgment, although not binding, was relevant for determining market value of similar land. It concluded that the reference court correctly applied the market value and that there was no ground to interfere. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit.

Issues considered

  • Whether the reference court was justified in enhancing compensation to Rs 3,000 per R for seasonally irrigated land.
  • Whether a non‑binding judgment from the same notification and village can be used to determine market value.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • land acquisition
  • compensation
  • market value
  • reference court
  • precedent
  • seasonally irrigated land
  • percolation tank

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:31941

                                                                                    FA 690/17
                                                     1

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                    33 FIRST APPEAL NO. 690 OF 2017

                                  THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
                                                 VERSUS
                                  PRAKASH ABASAHEB KHARAT AND ANR
                                                    ...
                                 AGP for Appellants/State : Mr. B.A. Shinde
                                                    ...

                                    CORAM        : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                    Dated        : July 27, 2026

              PER COURT :-

              1.     Admit.

              2.     As the acquisition proceeding was initiated in the year 2005, heard

              finally with the consent of learned counsel for respective parties.

              3.     By this appeal, the appellants/acquiring body is aggrieved by the

              judgment and award dated 28.4.2015 passed by the learned 2 nd Jt. Civil

              Judge, Senior Division, Jalna in LAR No. 577/2010, whereby the reference

              court has enhanced the compensation.

              4.     The land of the claimant admeasuring 30 R. from Gat No. 15

              situated at village Takle Pokhari, Taluka Mantha, District Jalna was acquired

              by the State for construction of Takle Pokhari Percolation Tank No. 3 Taluka

              Mantha. The notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was

              published on 21.11.2005. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has

              declared award on 29.1.2008. The SLAO has granted compensation at the

              rate of Rs. 710/- per R. for dry land and the same was enhanced by the

              reference court by determining the market value of the acquired land at

              the rate of Rs.3000/- per R. for seasonally irrigated land.

              5.     Mr. B.A. Shinde, learned AGP for the State submits that SLAO has
                                                                    FA 690/17
                                      2

granted proper compensation, but the reference court has enhanced the

same wrongly. He submits that the reference court has relied upon the

order passed in LAR No. 901/2010, arising out of the same notification and

from the same project and has granted compensation at the rate of

Rs.3000/- per R. for seasonally irrigated land.

6.     In spite of service, none appeared for original claimants.

7.     Having heard the learned AGP, with his assistance I have gone

through the record and proceedings and the impugned judgment and

award. On perusal of the record, it appears that after going through the

record, the SLAO has granted Rs.710/- per R. for acquired land. The

claimants have relied upon the judgment and award in LAR No. 901/2010,

arising out of the same notification and from the same village in which

market value of dry land was fixed at Rs.2000/- per R. and considering

that as the land involved in the present matter is seasonally irrigated land,

the reference court has granted compensation at the rate of Rs.3000/- per

R. Though the judgment and order in LAR No. 901/2010 is not binding

precedent, that can be used for determination of market value in the

present matter as it arises out of the same notification and in respect of

the lands from the same village and therefore, there is no reason to take

different view. Therefore, I hold that the reference court has rightly

determined the market value of the acquired land. I do not see any reason

to interfere in the impugned judgment and award. The appeal is devoid of

merits and the same is dismissed.



                                          ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )

ssc/


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.