Bombay High Court

GOPINATH NARAYAN DHOBLE DIED GAYABAI DIED LRS UMAKANT AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

The appeal is partly allowed, confirming compensation of Rs.4,846 per R, granting interest from 09.10.2006 per State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari, but denying interest for the delayed period, and modifying the original award accordingly.

Summary

The appellant, the legal heirs of the deceased Gopinath Narayan Dhoble, appealed against the State of Maharashtra challenging the compensation awarded for land acquired under a public purpose. The appeal arose from a 2013 award in Land Acquisition Reference No.1497 of 2012. The appellant argued that the same controversy had already been decided by a coordinate bench of the High Court in First Appeal No.2385 of 2021, and sought to have the present appeal disposed of on that basis. The respondents conceded that the issues were identical to those previously decided. The Court, agreeing with the coordinate bench decision, partly allowed the appeal, fixing compensation at Rs.4,846 per R, directing interest from 09.10.2006 as per State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari, but denying interest for any delayed period, and ordered modification of the original award.

Issues considered

Whether the present appeal should be decided afresh or can be disposed of by reference to the earlier coordinate bench judgment.
Whether the claimants are entitled to compensation at Rs.4,846 per R for the acquired dry lands.
Whether interest is payable from the date of the final award and whether interest for the delayed period is permissible.

Subjects

land acquisition
compensation
interest
coordinate bench
abatement order
delay condonation

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:45712
56-FA-776-2014.odt
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
56 FIRST APPEAL NO. 776 OF 2014
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10782 OF 1015
Gopinath Narayan Dhoble (Died)
Through Gayabai (Died) L.Rs. Umakant And Another
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
……
Mr. S.S. Halkude, Advocate for Appellant
Mr. S.S. Dande, AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2
……

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 28 SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION:
1. The present Civil Application is filed for bringing legal heirs of

deceased appellant by condoning delay of 72 days by setting aside the

abatement order, if any.

2. Considering the averments made in the application, the same is

allowed in terms of prayer clauses (B) and (C). Amendment to be carried

out accordingly.

ORDER IN FIRST APPEAL :

3. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

4. The present appeal arises out of the Judgment and Award dated

29.07.2013 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Udgir,,

in Land Acquisition Reference No.1497 of 2012 (Old L.A.R. No.420 of

2007).
56-FA-776-2014.odt
2

5. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a

copy of the judgment and order dated 13.07.2026 passed by the Coordinate

Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.2385 of 2021 and connected matters.

He submits that the land of the appellant was acquired from the same

villages, i.e. Dengewadi and Hipparaga (Daul) for the same public purpose

i.e. Daul Hipparga Storage Tank, 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 said order, and

consequently, the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof.

6. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 fairly

concedes the aforesaid position.

7. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel

for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the

controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by

the Coordinate Bench vide its order dated 13.07.2026 passed by the

Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.2385 of 2021 and

connected matters, I see no reason to take a different view. The present

appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment

and order. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

(i) The First Appeal is partly allowed.
56-FA-776-2014.odt
3

(ii) The Claimants are held entitled for the compensation @ Rs.4846/-

per R for the acquired lands i.e. dry lands, with statutory benefits on the

said amount.

(iii) The interest be calculated from the date of final Award i.e.

09.10.2006, as per the Judgment in State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva

Rangari, 2016 (3), 457.

(iv) The Claimants shall pay the deficit court fees, if any.

(v) The Claimants shall not be entitled for the interest for the delayed

period, if any.

(vi) Award passed by the learned Reference Court shall stand modified

accordingly.

(vii) Record and Proceedings be sent back to the learned Reference Court.

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE

S P Rane

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…