Bombay High Court

NAGNATH SAMBHAJI BHALKEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The 50% deduction from the comparable sale consideration was excessive and should be reduced to 20%, resulting in enhanced compensation for the claimants while confirming the rest of the reference court's award.

Summary

The case concerned the acquisition of land in 2008 for the Karkheli Storage Tank, Lohara, where the original award dated 4 August 2015 granted compensation based on rates of Rs.2,20,000, Rs.3,30,000 and Rs.4,40,000 per hectare for dry, seasonally irrigated and irrigated lands respectively. The claimants argued that the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) had inadequately compensated them, particularly by applying an unjustified 50% deduction from the sale consideration of a comparable parcel (Exhibit 16) and by undervaluing trees. The acquiring body contended that the LAO had correctly referred to all 35 sale instances and that only one claimant had proved his case, so the reference court should not have enhanced compensation on limited testimony. The bench examined the reasoning behind the 50% deduction and found it excessive, noting the lack of a clear criterion for such a reduction. Consequently, the court modified the deduction to 20% and partially allowed both the claimants' and the acquiring body's appeals, adjusting compensation to Rs.10,48,000, Rs.15,72,960 and Rs.20,97,280 per hectare for the respective land categories and granting statutory benefits and interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act. The remainder of the reference court's order was confirmed.

Issues considered

The adequacy of compensation awarded by the LAO for acquired land.
Whether the 50% deduction from the sale consideration of Exhibit 16 was justified.
Whether the reference court erred in enhancing compensation based on limited testimony.
The entitlement to statutory benefits and interest under the Land Acquisition Act.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28, 34

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation
valuation
deduction
statutory benefits
interest
reference court
appeal

Judgment

904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
904 FIRST APPEAL NO. 699 OF 2017

Megha Pralhadrao Biradar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5001 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Uttam Panditrao Patil And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5075 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Gangadhar Bhaurao Jadhav And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5083 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Wahedabi Sayyed Lal

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2032 OF 2016

Sadanand Shamrao Valakatte
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5086 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 1 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

Jabbar Sayyadlal Sayyad And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5087 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Subhash Narshing Kamble And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5082 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Sayyed Ismail Sayyed Lal And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1770 OF 2016

Sangram Ramrao Bhalke
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1776 OF 2016

Ramesh Sopan Mogale And Anr
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1774 OF 2016

Uttam Panditrao Patil And Anr
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2031 OF 2016

Deelip Ramrao Patil And Another
VERSUS
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 2 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5072 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Sikandar Bapurao Holkar

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5076 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Nagnath Sambhaji Bhalke

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5084 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Chandrkant Raghunath Jadhav (died) Thr Lrs Sulochanabai And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5089 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Afsarbi Sayyadlal Sayyed (died) Thr Lrs Malanbee And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5000 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Ramesh Sopan Mogale And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5073 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 3 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

Daivshala Sriram Tapshalkar

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1771 OF 2016

Hansraj Sopan Kamble Died Thr Lrs Panchasheela And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 691 OF 2017

Nagnath Sambhaji Bhalke
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5088 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Sayyed Habib Sayyed Lal

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 635 OF 2016

Gangadhar Bhaurao Jadhav And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 666 OF 2017

Pralahd Ganpatrao Biradar Died Thr Lrs Muktabai And Ors
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1773 OF 2016

Nagnath Sambhjaji Bhalke And Others
VERSUS
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 4 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4994 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Sangram Ramrao Bhalke

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5080 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Sadanand Shamrao Valakatte

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1768 OF 2016

Govind Gunwant Bhalke And Anr
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5074 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Bapurao Narayan Holkar (died) Thr Lrs Awadabai And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1765 OF 2016

Sambhaji Ganpatrao Kamble
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4999 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 5 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

Madhav Gurunath Bhalke And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4992 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Madhukar Sopan Gaikwad

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1772 OF 2016

Rasikabai Srirang Kamble And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2498 OF 2022
IN FA/2033/2016

Venkatrao Namdeorao Kasle And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Collector, Latur And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4995 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Govind Gunwant Bhalke And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4993 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Megha Pralhadrao Biradar

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4996 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 6 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

VERSUS
Nagnath Sambhaji Bhalke And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4991 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Pralhad Ganpatrao Biradar And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4997 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Jaiprakash Sanganna Mogale

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 4998 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Sambhaji Ganpatrao Kamble

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1775 OF 2016

Madhav Gurunath Bhalke And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5081 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
VERSUS
Deelip Ramrao Patil And Anr

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 5085 OF 2017

Executive Engineer, (medium Project) Division, Latur And Ors
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 7 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

VERSUS
Venkiatrao Namdeorao Kasle And Ors

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2030 OF 2016

Subhash Narsing Kamble And Another
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2033 OF 2016

Venkatrao Namdeorao Kasle And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2034 OF 2016

Chandrakant Raghunath Jadhav Since Deceased Thr Lrs Sulochanabai
Chandrakant Jadhav And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2036 OF 2016

Sikandar Bapurao Holkar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2037 OF 2016

Afsarbi Sayyadlal Sayyed Since Deceased Through Lrs Malanbee Khadarsab
Jamadar And Anr
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2038 OF 2016
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 8 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

Jabbar Sayyadlal Sayyad And Khajalal Minor U/g Mother Marembee
Sayyadlal Sayyad
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2035 OF 2016
Bapurao Narayan Holkar Since Deceased Thr His Lrs Awadabai And Another
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Ashwin S. Sakolkar a/w H. B. Nandagavale h/f Mr. Vijay G. Sakolkar for
the Appellants.
Mr. D. R. Korde, AGP for State.
Mr. B. R. Surwase for the acquiring body.
….

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 10 JULY 2026
P. C.:

1. Admit.

2. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 2008, heard finally with

the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

3. In all these Appeals, the Appellants-original claimants are aggrieved

by the judgment and award dated 4 th August 2015, passed by learned Jt.

Civil Judge Senior Division, Udgir in several LARs, whereby enhanced

compensation came to be granted.

4. The lands of the claimants were acquired for construction of Karkheli

Storage Tank, Lohara. The possession was taken on 4 th April 2007 and 17th

October 2007. The notification under Section 4 was published on 27 th April
This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 9 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

2007. The award was made on 17th June 2008 and the Petitioner came to

know about the award on 23rd June 2008. The LAO granted compensation

@Rs.2,20,000/-, Rs.3,30,000/- and Rs.4,40,00/- per hector for dry lands,

seasonally irrigated lands and irrigated lands respectively.

5. Mr. Ashwin Sakolkar a/w Mr. H. B. Nandagavale h/f Mr. Vijay

Sakolkar, learned counsel for the claimants submit that the LAO granted

inadequate compensation against which the claimants preferred references

wherein the quantum of compensation came to be enhanced by relying upon

sale instances at Exhs.16 to 18. The learned Reference Court erroneously

deducted 50% from the sale consideration of sale instance at Exh.16 while

determining market value of the lands acquired. He further submits that

such excessive deduction is unjust. He contends that the LAO granted

meager compensation for the trees. The claimants have proved valuer’s

report but the Reference Court failed to enhance the compensation as per

the market value stated in those reports. Therefore, he submits that the

claimants have made out a case for further enhancement in the present

Appeals. Hence, he prays to allow the Appeals filed by the claimants and

dismiss the Appeals filed by the acquiring body.

6. Mr. Surwase appears for the acquiring body in some matters. Despite

service, none appears for the acquiring body in other matters. Upon request,

Mr. Surwase appears in other matters on behalf of the acquiring body.

This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 10 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

7. Mr. Surwase, learned counsel appearing for the acquiring body

submits that LAO while determining compensation has already referred in

all 35 sale instances between the period from 7 th January 2005 to 8th March

2007. He further submits that only one claimant has stepped into witness

box and rest of the claimants have not proved their case for enhancement as

to whether acquired lands were dry, semi irrigated or irrigated and the

learned Reference Court ought not to have enhanced the compensation on

the basis of sole testimony of one claimant. He therefore, prays to dismiss

the Appeals filed by the claimants and allow the Appeals filed by the

acquiring body.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and gone

through record. The claimants had relied upon the sale instance below

Exh.16 which discloses that the southern boundary of the land therein is

abutting the Renapur road and thus it has facility of road frontage and easy

access. Thus, the land in said sale instance fetches higher value, whereas the

lands acquired do not have such facility which reduces its value. Therefore,

the learned Reference Court reduced 50% from the value of sale

consideration of the land in the said sale instance. But while applying such

deduction, the learned Reference Court has not given any criteria for such

deduction. It has failed to give reason for arriving at deduction of 50% from

the value of the sale consideration only upon guesswork. In my opinion, the

This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 11 of 12
904-FA-699-2017(corrected).doc

deduction of 50% is excessive and impugned award warrant interference to

that extent. Thus, I am inclined to partly allow the present Appeals thereby

applying deduction of 20% in the sale consideration of the sale instance

below Exh.16. Hence, I pass the following order:-

ORDER

i. The Appeals filed by the claimants are partly allowed

ii. The Appeals filed by the acquiring body are also partly allowed.

iii. The claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.10,48,000/-,

Rs.15,72,960/-, Rs.20,97,280/- per hector for dry lands, seasonal

irrigated lands and irrigated lands respectively.

iv. The claimants are entitled to statutory benefits and interest under

Sections 28 and 34 strictly in accordance with Full Bench

judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva

Rangari (2016(3) Mh.L.J. 457).

v. Rest of the order passed by the learned Reference Court stands

confirmed.

vi. Award be drawn up accordingly.

vii. Deficit Court fee be paid.

9. Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

[SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.]

This order is corrected pursuant to speaking to the minutes order dated 5th August 2026.

Shubham Page 12 of 12

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…