Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shamrao S/O Zingraji Dhole (Dead) ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 5747 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 5747 Bom
Judgement Date : 8 August, 2017

Bombay High Court
Shamrao S/O Zingraji Dhole (Dead) ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 8 August, 2017
Bench: S.B. Shukre
                                                                                                           fa-j 935-17.odt
                                                            1


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                              FIRST APPEAL NO. 935 OF 2017

           Shamrao s/o Zingraji Dhole (Dead)
           through his legal heirs

           1]          Ramchandra Shamrao Dhole
                       Aged about 82 years, Occ.:Agriculturist

           2]          Pramod Digambar Dhole
                       Aged about 55 years,Occ.: Service

           3]          Vinod Ramchandra Dhole
                       Aged about 52 years, Occ. Service

           4]          Dinesh Ramchandra Dhole
                       Aged about 50 years, Occ.: Agriculturist

           5]          Rajendra Pandurang Dhole
                       Aged about 50 years, Occ.: Agriculturist

           6]          Surendra Digambar Dhole
                       Aged about 48 years, Occ.: Service

           7]          Narendra Digambar Dhole
                       Aged about 44 years, Occ.:Agriculturist

           8]          Virendra Pandurang Dhole
                       Aged about 46 years, Occ.: Agriculturist
                       All R/o Deurwada, Tq. Digras
                       Distt. Yavatmal.             ....... APPELLANTS.
                                               
                       ...V E R S U S...

           1]          The State of Maharashtra.

           2]          The Collector,
                       Yavatmal.




::: Uploaded on - 11/08/2017                                                   ::: Downloaded on - 12/08/2017 02:00:45 :::
                                                                                                              fa-j 935-17.odt
                                                              2


             3]   Special Land Acquisition Officer,
                  Benefitted Zone, 
                  Arunawati Project Digras
                  Tq. & Distt. Yavatmal.                     .......RESPONDENTS.
                                                              
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Shri R.J. Shinde, Advocate for the Appellants.
              Shri A.M.Kadukar, AGP for the Respondents.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             CORAM:  S.B. SHUKRE, J.

DATE : 8 th AUGUST, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard

Admit.

Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2] There is no need to call for record and proceedings of the

Reference Application, as the issue involved in this appeal is squarely

covered by the award passed in Land Acquisition Proceeding No.

8/65/81-82 dated 16.9.1986.

3] In the present case, the acquired land is from survey

no.28/2, admeasuring 4.89 H.R., situated at village Deurwada and it

was acquired for the purpose of Arunawati Project. The Notification

under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on

25.6.1981. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 16.9.1986.

The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of the

fa-j 935-17.odt

acquired land to be of Rs.4,800/-per acre and since the appellant was

not satisfied with such determination, the appellant preferred an

application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. On merits of

the case, the Reference Court determined the rate of the land to be at

Rs.22,500/-per hectare. This rate was fixed by Reference Court in spite

of recording a finding that the acquired land was perennially irrigated

land. The appellant was not satisfied with such determination done by

the Reference Court and, therefore, the appellant is appeared before

this Court in the present appeal.

4] It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that

the issue involved in this case, which is of true and market valuation of

the acquired land is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court

rendered in the First Appeal No. 592 of 1994 dated 16.1.2017, as the

land involved in the present case is similar to the land in the said First

Appeal. On going through the judgment of this Court dated 16.1.2017, I

find that the land involved in that appeal could be equated with the

land involved in the present appeal in terms of its situation and the

similarities in quality, condition and fertility. The learned A.G.P. for the

State also does not raise any dispute about the same. This Court, for

perennially irrigated land, by its judgment dated 16.1.2017, in First

Appeal No.592 of 1994, determined the true and correct market value

of the land to be of Rs.1,30,000/- per hectare. The present land being

fa-j 935-17.odt

similar to the one involved in the First Appeal, would also fetch the

same market rate as found in the said appeal. Accordingly, I am of the

view that the market value of the land acquired in the present case,

ought to have been determined at Rs.1,30,000/- per hectare which I do

by this judgment.

5] Thus, I find that the appellant is entitled to receive the

compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,30,000/- per

hectare together with same interest and other benefits as are granted by

the Reference Court in the impugned award. However, it made clear

that the interest granted by the Reference Court at 9% per annum on

excess amount shall be for one year from the date of possession. It is

also made clear that the appellant shall not be entitled to receive any

interest on the compensation as is enhanced by this Court under this

order for the period from 10.10.1990 till date.

The impugned judgment and order stand modified in the

above terms.

The appeal is partly allowed accordingly.

If there is any deficit on account of payment of Court fee,

same shall be paid within two weeks from the date of order. No costs.

JUDGE

rgIngole

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter