Bombay High Court
Vasant Krishna Mahajan Died Thr ... vs The State Of Mah And Ors on 12 June, 2017
Bench: P.R. Bora
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL 3844 OF 2016.
Devidas s/o Ramrao Mahajan
Age: Major, occu. Agril.
R/o Tamberwadi, Tq.Paranda,
District Osmanabad. = APPELLANT/S
(orig. claimant)
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector,
Osmanabad.
2) The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division,
Osmanabad, Tq. And Dist.
Osmanabad.
3) Shridhar Ramrao Mahajan(died)
Through his L.Rs.
3a) Nanasaheb s/o Shridhar Mahajan,
age: Major, occ. Agril.
3b) Kaushalyabai w/o Shridhar Mahajan,
Age: Major, occ. Household,
All R/o Tambewai, Tq.Paranda,
Dist. Osmanabad.
3d) Surekha w/o Narayan Thite,
age: Major, occu. Household,
R/o Agalgaon, Tq.Bashi,
Dist. Solapur.
3e) Daivaishala w/o Bhausaheb Hawle,
ag: Major, occu. Household,
R/o Devlai, Tq. Paranda,
Dist. Osmanabad. = RESPONDENT/S
AND
FIRST APPEAL 3845 OF 2016.
::: Uploaded on - 16/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 00:37:54 :::
2
1) Vasant Kjrishna Mahajan (died)
Through its legal heir -
1a) Abhijeet s/o Vasant Mahajan,
Age: Major, occ. Agril.
1b) Kalandabai w/o Vasant Mahajan
Age: Major, occu. Agril.
All R/o Tambewadi, Tq.Paranda,
Dist. Osmanabad. = APPELALNTS
( ORIG.CLAIMANT)
versus
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector,
Osmanabad.
2) The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division,
Osmanabad, Tq. And Dist.
Osmanabad. = RESPONDENTS
-----
Mr. ES Murge, Advocate for Appellant/s;
S/Shri RB Bagul and SP Sonpawale, AGPs for
Respondent No.1.
Mr.GB Rajale, Adv. For Resp.No.2.
-----
CORAM : P.R.BORA, J.
DATE :
12 th
June,2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT:
1) Heard finally with consent of learned
counsel for the respective parties.
2) Since both the appeals arise from the
::: Uploaded on - 16/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 00:37:54 :::
3
common acquisition proceedings, and issues raised
therein are similar, I deem it appropriate to
decide both the appeal by common reasoning.
3) When the present appeals were called
upon for hearing, learned Counsel appearing for
the appellants submitted that companion matters
arising out of the same acquisition proceedings
are finally disposed of by this Court (Coram:
V.K.Jadhav,J.) vide judgment delivered on 26th
April, 2017. The learned Counsel has placed on
record a copy of the said common judgment so
passed by this Court in FA No.993/2011 with the
connected appeals. The learned Counsel further
submits that present two appeals were also to be
tagged along with the said appeals, however, they
could not be tagged and, therefore, have remained
undecided. The learned Counsel further submits
that the present appeals also pertain to the
acquisition for the purposes of Tambewadi Medium
Project. The learned Counsel further submitted
that the lands, which are the subject matter of
::: Uploaded on - 16/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 00:37:54 :::
4
the present appeals were also acquired for the
same project and Section 4 notification in that
regard was published in the Government Gazette on
31st August, 1989. The learned Counsel further
submitted that in the appeals decided by this
Court, vide order dated 26th April, 2017, this
Court (Coram: V.K.Jadhav,J.) had enhanced the
amount of compensation by determining the market
rate of the subject lands to the tune of
Rs.72,000/- per acre for irrigated lands and has
also awarded all the statutory benefits. The
learned Counsel further submitted that the lands,
which are the subject matter of the present
appeals, are irrigated lands and as such, the
claimants are entitled for the enhanced
compensation @ Rs.72,000/- per acre.
4) Shri Rajale, learned Counsel appearing
for the acquiring body and learned AGP for the
State, have not disputed the correctness of the
facts as are stated by learned Counsel for the
appellants/claimants. Moreover, I have gone
::: Uploaded on - 16/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 00:37:54 :::
5
through the judgment delivered by this Court in
First Appeal No.993/2011 with the connected
appeals. There seems no dispute that the lands,
which are the subject matter of the present
appeals, were acquired for the same project.
There further seems no dispute that the lands
which are the subject matter of the present
appeals were irrigated lands. The Reference
Court in para 12 of the impugned judgment has
also noted the said aspect. In view of the
facts, as aforesaid, and more particularly since
the learned Counsel appearing for the acquiring
body and the learned AGP appearing for the State,
both have not disputed the correctness of the
facts stated by the learned counsel for the
appellants - claimants, I see no difficulty in
allowing both the present appeals in terms of the
order passed by this Court (Coram:V.K.Jadhav,J.)
in FA No.993/2011 with the connected appeals on
26th April, 2017. Hence, the following order, -
::: Uploaded on - 16/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/06/2017 00:37:54 :::
6
ORDER
i) The compensation as awarded by the
Reference Court to the tune of Rs.49,777/- per
acre is enhanced to Rs.72,000/- per acre with all
the statutory benefits as are admissible;
ii) In view of the order passed by this
Court in CA No.14136/2012 in FA St.No.22030/2012
with CA No. 14137/2012 in FA St.No.22071/2012 and
in view of the undertaking furnished by the
appellants/claimants, the appellant/claimants are
not entitled for the interest for the period of
delay;
iii) The appellants/claimants shall pay the
deficit court fees, if any;
iv) The award be accordingly modified after
payment of the deficit court fees.
v) Both the appeals stand allowed in the
aforesaid terms. Pending Civil Applications, if
any, stand disposed of.
(P.R.BORA)
JUDGE
bdv/
