Bombay High Court
State Of Maharashtra Through ... vs Purushottam Nagorao Nistane And ... on 16 March, 2016
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
fast12667.14.J.odt 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.12667 OF 2014
1] State of Maharashtra through
Collector, Amravati.
2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Wardha Project No.4,
Amravati.
3] The Executive Engineer,
Upper Wardha Canal Division No.3,
Dhamangaon Railway, Dist. Amravati.
4] Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, Civil Lines, Nagpur through
Executive Engineer, Lower Wardha
Project Division, Wardha. ....... APPELLANTS
...V E R S U S...
1] Purushottam Nagorao Nistane,
Aged adult, Occ: Agriculturist.
2] Niwruttin Nagorao Nistane,
Aged adult, Occ: Agriculturist.
3] Ramkrushna Ganpatrao Nistane,
Aged adult, Occ: Agriculturist.
4] Chandrashekhar Vitthalrao Nistane,
Aged adult, Occ: Agriculturist.
5] Vinod Vithalrao Nistane,
Aged adult, Occ: Agriculturist.
6] Dinkar Vithalrao Nistane,
Aged adult, Agriculture.
7] Rangubai Vithalrao Nistane,
Aged adult, Occ: Household.
::: Uploaded on - 21/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:12:33 :::
fast12667.14.J.odt 2/4
All above 1 to 7 are R/o Shidodi,
Tq. Dhamangaon Railway,
Disttrict Amravati. ....... RESPONDENTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri M.A. Kadu, AGP for Appellant Nos.1 & 2.
Shri S.K. Bhoyar, Advocate for Appellant No.4.
Shri S.S. Shingane, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1, 4 to 7.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: R.K. DESHPANDE, J.
th MARCH, 2016.
DATE: 16
ORAL JUDGMENT
1]
While issuing notice on the application for condonation of
delay on 19.09.2014, this Court had also issued notice on first appeal on
merits for final disposal, with a rider that if the Court is satisfied on the
question of condonation of delay, the matter shall be heard on its own
merits without issuing any fresh notice to the respondent.
Accordingly, all the parties are served. The delay has already been
condoned.
2] Admit.
3] The learned counsels appearing for the respondent waives
service of notice.
4] By consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final
hearing, as it is reported that the controversy involved is concluded by
fast12667.14.J.odt 3/4
the decision of this Court.
5] In Land Acquisition Case No.136 of 2000 decided on
19.07.2013, the reference was partly allowed and compensation at the
rate of Rs.60,000/- per hectare for 2.04 HR of the land and Rs.30,000/-
per hectare for 0.08 R of land acquired, was granted along with all the
statutory benefits payable to the claimant. The appeal has been preferred
by the State Government challenging such enhancement.
6] The learned counsels appearing for the parties have invited
my attention to the decision of this Court given on 12.04.2007 in First
Appeal No.159 of 2007 VIDC vs. Ramesh Janraoji Sawant in which the
price fixed was revised to Rs.60,000/- per hectare. The learned counsel
appearing for the parties agree that the present matter arises out of the
same notification, same project, and the same award for acquisition of
land passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Similarly, the reason for
fixation of price recorded by the Reference Court in the judgment and
order impugned are also the same. Hence, following the decision of this
Court in First Appeal No.159 of 2007 the present first appeal is also
dismissed. No costs.
7] The learned A.G.P. submits that the cheque for deposit of
the entire decretal amount is ready with him, and the same shall be
fast12667.14.J.odt 4/4
deposited in this Court within a period of one week from today. In view
of this, if the amount is deposited the decree would be satisfied and
there shall be no question of executing the decree. If the amount is not
deposited or short deposited within a week, the decree to that extent
shall not be executable. The claimants are permitted to withdraw the
amount, if any, deposited by the appellant.
ig JUDGE
NSN
