Bombay High Court
BALIRAM MULCHAND PATIL, DIED THR. L.RS. SHRIKRISHAN AND ORSversusTHE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, M.I.D.C. NASHIK AND ORS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
Since the acquired lands are from the same village, acquired for the same public purpose under the same notification as in First Appeal No. 1210/2012, the present appeals are covered by that decision and the claimants are entitled to enhanced market value of Rs.2,60,000 per hectare with statutory benefits.
Summary
These appeals arise from two reference court awards in LAR No. 80/1998 and LAR No. 32/1998 concerning acquisition of the claimants' lands for M.I.D.C. Dhule. The claimants and the acquiring body argued that the lands were from the same village, acquired for the same public purpose and under the same notification as in First Appeal No. 1210/2012 (The Divisional Officer, M.I.D.C., Nashik v. Yadav Bhivsan Patil and Others) decided on 28.7.2026. The learned AGP fairly conceded that the controversy is identical. The Court accepted that the present appeals are squarely covered by the earlier judgment and saw no reason to take a different view. It therefore disposed of the appeals in terms of that judgment. First Appeal No. 740/2012 filed by the acquiring body was dismissed, while Cross Objection No. 288/2026 and First Appeal No. 1258/2005 filed by the claimants were partly allowed. The market value of the acquired lands was enhanced to Rs.2,60,000 per hectare, with consequential statutory benefits and interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, subject to the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari and no interest for the delayed period.
Issues considered
- Whether the present appeals are covered by the judgment in First Appeal No. 1210/2012 dated 28.7.2026?
- Whether the claimants are entitled to enhancement of compensation at the rate determined in the connected matters?
- Whether the acquiring body's appeal against the reference court award is liable to be dismissed?
- Whether the claimants are entitled to statutory benefits and interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 34
Subjects
- Land Acquisition
- Compensation
- Market Value
- M.I.D.C.
- Same Notification
- Statutory Benefits
- Interest
- Section 34
- Cross Objection
- First Appeal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40621
FA 1258/05 & anr.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
50 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1258 OF 2005
DEORAM ZIPA PATIL
VERSUS
SPECIAL LAND ACQ OFFICER AND ANR
...
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. A.B. Kale
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.N. Morampalle
Advocate for Respondent 3 : Mr. S.S. Dande
...
81 X-OBJECTION NO. 288 OF 2026
IN FA/740/2012
BALIRAM MULCHAND PATIL, DIED THR. L.RS. SHRIKRISHAN AND ORS
VERSUS
THE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, M.I.D.C. NASHIK AND ORS
...
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 740 OF 2012
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11370 OF 2019 IN FA/740/2012
THE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MIDC, NASIK
VERSUS
BALIRAM MULCHAND PATIL, DIED THR. L.RS. SHRIKRISHAN AND ORS
…
Advocate for appellant/acquiring body : Mr. S.S.Dande
Advocate for X-objectioner/claimant : Mr. A.B. Kale
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.D. Wange
…
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : August 31, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. The present appeals arises out of the Judgment and Award dated
9.8.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule in LAR
No. 80/1998 and judgment and award dated 30.3.2011 passed by the Jt.
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule in LAR No. 32/1998, respectively.
3. The learned counsel for the acquiring body and original claimants
FA 1258/05 & anr.
2
submits that the lands of the claimants were acquired from the same
village, for the same public purpose i.e. M.I.D.C. Dhule, and under the same
notification as involved in the First Appeal No. 1210/2012 (The Divisional
Officer, M.I.D.C., Nashik Vs. Yadav Bhivsan Patil And Others) and other
connected matters dated 28.7.2026. It is, therefore, contended that the
controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the
judgment and order in FA No. 1210/12 (supra), and consequently, the
present appeals deserve to be disposed of in terms thereof. The learned
A.G.P. appearing for respondent/State fairly concedes the aforesaid position.
4. 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
this Court in FA No. 1210/12 (supra), 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) First Appeal No. 740/2012 preferred by the appellant/acquiring body
is dismissed.
(ii) Cross Objection No. 288/2026 in FA No. 740/2012 and First Appeal
No. 1258/2005 preferred by the claimants are partly allowed.
(iii) The market value of the acquired lands is enhanced and determined
at Rs.2,60,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Sixty Thousand only) per Hectare.
(iv) The claimants shall be entitled to all consequential statutory benefits
on the enhanced compensation in accordance with the provisions of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
FA 1258/05 & anr.
3
(v) The claimants shall also be entitled to interest under Section 34 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, strictly in accordance with the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari
2016 (3) Mh.L. J. 457.
(vi) The claimants shall not be entitled to interest for the delayed period,
if any, in accordance with the orders passed in the respective matters.
(vii) Save and except the above modification in the quantum of
compensation, the impugned Judgments and Awards passed by the learned
Reference Court shall remain unaltered.
(viii) The Bank Guarantees, if any, furnished by the respective claimants
stand discharged.
(ix) The claimants shall pay deficit court fees, if any.
(x) The claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by
the appellant-acquiring body, together with accrued interest, if any, upon
furnishing the usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar
(Judicial) of this Court.
(xi) Modified award be drawn accordingly.
(xii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…