Bombay High Court
THE STATE OF MAH AND ANRversusGANPAT SAKHARAM DESHMUKH
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The Court upheld the enhanced compensation but modified the interest award under Section 34 to conform with the Full Bench precedent.
Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed a 2012 award in a land acquisition case against Ganpat Sakharm Deshmukh, challenging the compensation and interest awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and the Reference Court. The SLAO had fixed compensation at Rs.600 per unit, which the Reference Court enhanced to Rs.8,87,490 after deducting 30% from market values based on pre‑notification sale instances. The State contended that the interest awarded under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, conflicted with the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari. The Court examined the sale evidence and found no illegality in the enhanced compensation but held that the interest award was contrary to the Full Bench precedent. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed: the interest component was modified to comply with the Full Bench ruling, while the rest of the Reference Court’s order remained unchanged. Pending civil applications, if any, were also disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the interest awarded under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is permissible in light of the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari.
- Whether the enhancement of compensation based on sale instances prior to the issuance of the Section 4 notification is valid.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 32, 34, 4
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- interest
- Section 34
- Section 32
- Full Bench precedent
- partial appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:26688
1 of 3 942-FA.817.2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
942 FIRST APPEAL NO. 817 OF 2015
THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR
VERSUS
GANPAT SAKHARAM DESHMUKH
...
Ms. A. S. Mantri, AGP for the Appellants-State.
...
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10579 OF 2012
IN FA/817/2015
THE STATE OF MAH AND ANR
VERSUS
GANPAT SAKHARAM DESHMUKH
…
Ms. A. S. Mantri, AGP for the Appellants-State.
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 2nd JULY, 2026
P.C.:-
1. Heard Ms. A. S. Mantri, learned AGP for the
Appellants/State. By consent of the learned AGP, the matter is taken up
for final hearing at the admission stage.
2. By the present appeal, the Appellants/State are aggrieved by
the judgment and award dated 31.01.2012 passed by the learned Joint
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Beed, in LAR No.364 of 2009.
3. Learned AGP for the Appellants submits that the Special Land
Acquisition Officer (SLAO) awarded compensation @ of Rs.600/- per R
and the learned Reference Court further enhanced the total
Tauseef
2 of 3 942-FA.817.2015
compensation to Rs.8,87,490/-. She submits that the SLAO awarded
compensation after considering the nature and quality of the acquired
land. She further submits that the interest under Section 34 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, awarded by the learned Reference Court is
contrary to the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in State
of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari, reported in 2016 (3) Mh.L.J.
457.
4. Though served, none appears for the Respondent/Claimant.
5. I have heard the learned AGP for the Appellants and perused
the record as well as the judgment and award passed by the learned
Reference Court. The learned Reference Court has considered the sale
instances produced below Exhibits-23 and 28 and after deducting 30%
from the market value reflected therein, enhanced the compensation.
The sale instances relied upon are prior to the issuance of the
notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, I
do not find any perversity or illegality in the judgment and award
passed by the learned Reference Court, except for the interest part
under Section 34 of the Act. In view of the above, I am inclined to
partly allow the present appeal. Hence, I pass the following order:-
ORDER
(i) The present appeal is partly allowed.
Tauseef
3 of 3 942-FA.817.2015
(ii) Insofar as the interest under Section 32 is concerned,
the Claimants shall be entitled to receive the same from
the date of award in accordance with the law laid down
by the Full Bench of this Court in Kailash Shiva Rangari
(supra) and to that extent, clause 4 of the operative
part of the order passed by the learned Reference Court
stands modified.
(iii) Rest of the order of the learned Reference Court stands
unaltered.
(iv) Pending civil applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)
Tauseef
Checking your session…