Ramrao Santoba Kopnar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 5936 Bom

                                          1                 3555-2019-FA-917


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             FIRST APPEAL NO. 3555 OF 2019

Ramrao S/o Santoba Kopnar
Age : 35 years, Occu : Agriculture,
R/o. Kaudgaon Ghoda,
Taluka - Parali,
District - Beed                                              .. Appellants

          Versus

1] The State of Maharashtra
   Through Collector, Beed

2] The Executive Engineer,
   Beed - Majalgaon Canal Division No. 5,
   (E.G.S.), Parali Vaijnath,
   A/P Taluka - Parali, Dist. Beed

      (As it is merged with Executive Engineer,
      Majalgaon Canal Division No. 7, Kodri Road,
      Jaikwadi Wasahat, At Post - Gangakhed,
      District - Parbhani                                   .. Respondents

                                         ...
                   Ms. Tanvi V. Jadhav, Advocate for the appellant
                     Mr. S.S. Dande, AGP for respondent - State
                   Mr. B.R. Survase, Advocate for respondent no. 2
                                         ...

                                      CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.
                                      DATE : 01-04-2021

ORDER :

1. The only issue raised in this Appeal is in respect of non-grant

of interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act.

2 3555-2019-FA-917

2. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant points out that the land

owned by the appellant was acquired for Beed - Majalgaon Canal

Division No. 5 and Award was passed on 23-09-1996 bearing

no. LNQ/SR/20/89. The claimant on not satisfying with the amount

determined by the Land Acquisition Officer towards the compensation,

filed Reference under section 18 which came to be partly allowed and

the amount of compensation was enhanced, however, no amount of

interest has been awarded under section 28 for which the claimant is

entitled for.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that his prayer is

restricted only to grant of interest under section 28 which has not been

granted by the learned Reference Court.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent - Acquiring Body

submits that though in clause 5 of the operative part of the Order dated

05-08-2019, the Court has directed that the interest is granted under

section 34, however, the same is under section 28 and not under

section 34.

3 3555-2019-FA-917

6. On a specific query put to him, whether the Acquiring Body

has applied for correction of the said mistake, the answer was in the

negative.

7. The Judgments @ State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva

Rangari1, Lalitkumar Himmatlal Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra 2,

Pandhari Dhondiba Nukulwad Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others

(First Appeal No. 2270 of 2014) 3 and State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramesh

Tukaram Meshram4 cited by learned counsel for the appellant show that

this Court has held in numerous Judgments that the claimants are

entitled for interest under section 28 from the date of the Award till its

realization.

8. In that view of the matter, I partly allow the present Appeal

and grant interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act from the

date of the Award till its realization. The interest for the first year from

the date of the Award would be @ 9% per annum and after one year, the

interest would be @ 15% per annum.

9. The Appeal is disposed of.

                                                    [ ANIL S. KILOR ]
                                                        JUDGE
arp/
1     2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457
2     2012 (4) Mh.L.J. 742
3     2020 (2) Mh.L.J. 412
4     2018 (3) Mh.L.J. 616