Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 9237 Bom
Judgement Date : 30 November, 2017
fa212.08.odt 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL No.212 OF 2008
1. The State of Maharashtra.
2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Minor Irrigation Works, Buldana. : APPELLANTS
...VERSUS...
1. Manikrao Kaduba Tayade (dead)
Legal Representatives :
(1) Smt. Kasturabai Manikrao Tayade,
Aged 58 years.
(2) Sau. Lankabai Devidas Bawaskar,
Aged 38 years.
(3) Subhash Manikrao Tayade,
Aged 35 years.
(4) Sau. Sugandhabai Subhash Raut,
Aged 33 years.
(5) Sau. Ushabai Dattatraya Bhonde,
Aged 30 years.
(6) Ku. Asha Manikrao Tayade,
Aged 25 years.
(7) Ku. Manisha Manikrao Tayade,
Aged 20 years.
(8) Ku. Jijabai Uttamrao Dahatonde,
Aged 43 years.
(9) Chandrakala w/o. Ambadas Kanadje,
Aged 58 years.
Smt. Kasturbai Manikrao Tayade,
All R/o. Kardi, Tq. & Distt. Buldana. : RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Shri M.A. Kadu, Asstt. Government Pleader for the Appellant.
None appears for respondents
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/12/2017 01:14:35 :::
fa212.08.odt 2/3
CORAM : S.B. SHUKRE, J.
th DATE : 30 NOVEMBER, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. This is an appeal which challenges the
legality and correctness of the judgment and order dated 13.4.2004
commonly passed in about 81 land acquisition cases by the Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana. This appeal arises out of the
Land Acquisition Case No. 60 of 1996, decided by the Reference
Court.
2. The acquired land in the present case forms a
chunk of all the lands acquired for the purpose of construction of a
water tank at mouza Kardi, Tahsil and District Buldhana. In First
Appeal No. 153 of 2008 and First Appeal No. 209 of 2008, decided
on 29th November 2017, arising out of the same judgment and
order, as impugned herein, this Court has confirmed the rates of
land, well and trees determined by the Reference Court. The rate
of land with irrigation facility has been determined by the
Reference Court to be at Rs. 90,000/- per hectare while it is
fa212.08.odt 3/3
determined at Rs. 75,000/- per hectare for dry-crop land and these
rates have been confirmed by this Court.
3. The acquired land in the present case, as
stated earlier, is a part of the larger chunk of the lands acquired for
water tank project at mouza Kardi. It was a land having irrigation
facility where there were standing trees and well. It being similar
to those lands as are involved in First Appeal No. 153 of 2008,
there is no reason for this Court to take a different view of the
matter. The facts of this case and the facts involved in the said
appeals, particularly, FA No. 153 of 2008, are not disputed by
learned Assistant Government Pleader for the appellant-State and
so, this appeal would have to be decided on the similar lines.
4. In the circumstances, I find that this appeal
deserves to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly. No costs.
S. B. SHUKRE, J
joshi
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!