Vidarbha Irrigation ... vs Sanjay Vithalrao Wankhade & 2 ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7797 Bom

FA  247/06                                               1                          Judgment

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

                            FIRST APPEAL NO. 247/2006

Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation,
through it's Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Pusad,
Dist. Yavatmal.                                                                   APPELLANT
                                        .....VERSUS.....

1.       Sanjay Vithalrao Wankhade,
         aged about 30 years, Occ. Agriculturist,
         R/o Kholapuri, Post Satafal,
         Tq:-Ner, Dist. Yavatmal.
2.       State of Maharashtra,
         through Collector, Yavatmal.
3.       Special Land Acquisition Officer,
         Lower Pus Project Division, Pusad,
         Dist. Yavatmal.                                                         RESPONDE
                                                                                          NTS


                          Shri A.B. Patil, counsel for the appellant.
           Shri B.Vora with Mrs.Sonali Saware, counsel for the respondent no.1.
     Ms H.N. Jaipurkar, Assistant Government Pleader for the non-applicant nos.2 and 3.


                                                CORAM    :         S.B. SHUKRE,  J.

DATE : 4 TH OCTOBER, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Shri A.B. Patil, learned counsel for the appellant,

Shri B.Vora, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Ms H.N.

Jaipurkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.2

and 3.

2. In this case, there is no dispute about the fact that a the land

involved in the connected appeal was similar to the land involved in the

FA 247/06 2 Judgment

present case. This Court has disposed of the connected matter bearing

First Appeal No.246 of 2006 on 18.07.2017. While disposing of the

connected appeal, this Court determined the compensation for Pot Kharab

land at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per hectare and for the cultivable land at

the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per hectare. The land involved in the connected

appeal was covered by the same Section 4 notification and same project.

Learned counsel appearing for both sides do not dispute these facts.

Therefore, I am of the view that even this appeal deserves to be disposed

of on similar lines as First Appeal No.246 of 2006 and accordingly it is

disposed of as such.

3. The appeal is partly allowed. It is declared that the

respondent no.1-claimant is entitled to receive compensation at the rate

of Rs.25,000/- per hectare for Pot Kharab land admeasuring 1.18 HR and

compensation at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per hectare for the cultivable

land admeasuring 1.85 HR. It is further declared that the respondent

no.1-claimant is also entitled to receive compensation for 101 big orange

trees at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per tree, compensation for 124 small

orange trees at the rate of Rs.900/- per tree and compensation for 03

mango trees at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per tree. The compensation granted

by the reference Court in respect of well and pipeline is confirmed. The

impugned award stands modified in the above terms. The parties to bear

their own costs.

FA 247/06 3 Judgment

The first appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE

APTE