Bombay High Court

GOVIND BABURAO PATILversusTHE EX. ENGINEER, PATBANDHARE PRO., OMERGA AND ORS

Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

Holding

Since the controversy is identical to and covered by the order in First Appeal No.958 of 2013, the appeals and cross-objections are disposed of in terms thereof, enhancing compensation and granting statutory benefits and interest as per the Full Bench decision.

Summary

These appeals and cross-objections arose from a common judgment and award dated 17.01.2014 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga, in Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 279 of 2008 and 278 of 2008. The acquiring body challenged the award, while the claimants filed cross-objections seeking enhancement. The claimants pointed out that this Court had already decided an identical controversy in First Appeal No.958 of 2013 and connected matters by order dated 03.08.2026, concerning acquisition of lands from village Chendkal for the same public purpose, namely the Tall Canal of Storage Tank Bhiksarsangvi, under the same notification. The acquiring body and the AGP fairly conceded this position. The Court accepted that the matter was squarely covered by the earlier order and saw no reason to take a different view. Accordingly, the appeals and cross-objections were partly allowed, and the impugned award was modified. The claimants were held entitled to compensation at Rs.4,400 per R for irrigated land, Rs.3,300 per R for semi-irrigated land, and Rs.2,200 per R for dry land, with consequential statutory benefits and interest under Section 34 as per the Full Bench decision in Kailas Shiva Rangari. Directions were also issued regarding deficit court fees, withdrawal of amounts, and payment of any excess to the acquiring body.

Issues considered

Whether the present appeals and cross-objections are squarely covered by the order dated 03.08.2026 in First Appeal No.958 of 2013 and connected matters.
Whether the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation for irrigated, semi-irrigated, and dry lands.
Whether the claimants are entitled to statutory benefits and interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in accordance with the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 34

Subjects

Land Acquisition
Compensation
Enhanced Compensation
Cross-Objections
Interest
Section 34
Full Bench
Statutory Benefits
Irrigated Land
Semi-Irrigated Land
Dry Land

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43291
8-FA-1157-2017.odt
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

8 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1157 OF 2017

The Executive Engineer, Patbandhare Project, Omerga And Others
VERSUS
Kantabai Suryakant Patil

AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1158 OF 2017

The Executive Engineer, Patbandhare Project, Omerga And Others
VERSUS
Govind Baburao Patil

AND
X-OBJECTION NO. 77 OF 2023 IN FA/1157/2017

Kantabai Suryakant Patil (mane)
VERSUS
The Executive Engineer, Patbandhare Project, Omerga And Others

AND
X-OBJECTION NO. 56 OF 2023 IN FA/1158/2017

Govind Baburao Patil
VERSUS
The Ex. Engineer, Patbandhare Pro., Omerga And Others

……
Mr. G. B. Rajale, Advocate for Appellant in both FAs and for Respondent in
X-objections
Mr. V.V. Ingale, Advocate for Respondents in Both FAs and for Applicants in
X-objections
Mr.A.M. Phule, AGP for State
……

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
8-FA-1157-2017.odt
2

2. The present appeals and cross-objections arise out of the common

impugned Judgment and Award dated 17.01.2014 passed by the learned

Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga, in Land Acquisition Reference

No.279 of 2008 (Old L.A.R. No.144 of 2005) and Land Acquisition

Reference No.278 of 2008 (Old L.A.R. No.143 of 2005).

3. The learned counsel for the claimants has tendered across the Bar a

copy of the order dated 03.08.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal

No.958 of 2013 and connected matters. He submits that the lands of the

appellants were acquired from village Chendkal for the same public purpose,

i.e. Tall Canal of Storage Tank Bhiksarsangvi, under the very same

notification as involved in the said appeal. It is, therefore, contended that

the controversy involved in the present appeals is squarely covered by the

order dated 03.08.2026 passed in First Appeal No.958 of 2013 and

connected matters and, consequently, the present appeals as well as the

cross-objections deserve to be disposed of in terms thereof. Learned counsel

Mr. Rajale, appearing for the acquiring body, as well as the learned AGP,

fairly concede the aforesaid position.

4. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for

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

controversy involved in the present appeals is identical to the one decided

by this Court in First Appeal No.958 of 2013 and connected matters vide

order dated 03.08.2026, I see no reason to take a different view. The present
8-FA-1157-2017.odt
3

appeals as well as the cross-objections, therefore, deserve to be disposed of

in terms of the said judgment and order. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

(i) The cross-objections filed by the original claimants are partly
allowed.

(ii) The appeals filed by the acquiring body are partly allowed.

(iii) The common impunged Judgment and Award dated 17.01.2014
passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nilanga in Land
Acquisition Reference No.279 of 2008and Land Acquisition Reference
No.278 of 2008 is modified.

(iv) In the cross-objections filed by the claimants, the claimants are
entitled to receive compensation at the rate of Rs.4,400/- per R for irrigated
lands, Rs.3,300/- per R for semi-irrigated lands and Rs.2,200/- per R for dry
lands, as per the categorization made by the Reference Court.

(v) The claimant shall be entitled to all consequential statutory benefits
on the enhanced compensation in accordance with the provisions of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(vi) The claimant shall be entitled to interest under Section 34 of the Act,
strictly in accordance with the Full Bench decision in State of Maharashtra
vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457.

(vii) Save and except the above modification, the common impugned
Judgment and Award dated 17.01.2014 shall remain unaltered.
8-FA-1157-2017.odt
4

(viii) The claimants shall pay the deficit court fees, if any, on the enhanced
amount.

(ix) The appellants/claimants are permitted to withdraw the remaining
amount along with the accrued interest, after adjusting the interest
component in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in
State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (4) Mh.L.J. 457
(supra).

(x) At the time of withdrawal of the amount, the Registrar (Judicial)
shall verify all the requisite documents, including the heirship certificate, if
any.

(xi) After payment of the amount to the claimants, if any excess amount
remains, the same shall be paid to the acquiring body along with the
accrued interest thereon.

(xii) The modified award be drawn accordingly.

(xiii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
S P Rane

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…