Bombay High Court
KANTABAI SURYAKANT PATIL (MANE)versusTHE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PATBANDHARE PROJECT, OMERGA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED
Holding
The controversy is identical to that decided in First Appeal No.958 of 2013, so the present appeals and cross‑objections are disposed of in accordance with that judgment, with a modification of the award as specified.
Summary
The case concerned lands acquired from village Chendkal for the Tall Canal of Storage Tank Bhiksarsangvi. The original judgment and award dated 17‑01‑2014 was challenged by the acquiring body (Executive Engineer) and cross‑objections were filed by the claimants (Kantabai and Govind). The court observed that the same controversy had already been decided in First Appeal No.958 of 2013, order dated 03‑08‑2026, and therefore chose to follow that precedent. Accordingly, the appeals and cross‑objections were partly allowed and the award was modified to increase compensation rates for irrigated, semi‑irrigated and dry lands, grant interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and provide statutory benefits. The court also directed procedural steps for withdrawal of the enhanced amount and disposition of any excess, while leaving the rest of the original award unchanged.
Issues considered
- The present appeals and cross‑objections raise the same legal questions as those decided in First Appeal No.958 of 2013.
- Whether the compensation rates for the acquired lands should be enhanced as per the earlier decision.
- Whether claimants are entitled to interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether the original award should be modified or left unchanged.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 34
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- interest
- Section 34
- award modification
- precedent
- cross‑objection
- appeal
- Maharashtra
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43290
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
Checking your session…