Bombay High Court
The Ex. Engineer, Minor ... vs Kesharbai Shrinivas Adsul on 9 April, 2021
Bench: Anil S. Kilor
1 935-FA-1950-20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.1950 OF 2020
WITH CA/2676/2021 IN FA/1950/2020
WITH CA/11040/2019 IN FA/1950/2020
1. The Executive Engineer,
Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad.
2. The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Collector, Osmanabad.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Ofcer,
(P.T. & M.I.D.No.1), Medium Project,
Osmanabad. .. Appellants
(Original Respondents)
Versus
Kesharbai Shrinivas Adsul,
Age 55 years, Occu. Household and Agri.
R/o. Bhogaji, Taluka Kallam,
District Osmanabad. .. Respondent
(Original claimant)
...
Mr. Ruturaj C. Patil, Advocate for Appellant No.1 Acquiring Body.
Mr. B. V. Virdhe, A.G.P. for Appellants No. 2 and 3.
Mr. Rahul D. Khadap, Advocate for Respondent-sole.
...
CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.
DATE : 9th APRIL, 2021
ORAL ORDER :-
This is an appeal preferred by appellant- Acquiring Body i.e.
Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad and
State of Maharashtra along with Special Land Acquisition Ofcer
questioning the correctness of the Judgment and Award dated
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2021 05:07:10 :::
2 935-FA-1950-20.odt
07-11-2014 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Osmananbad, in Land Acquisition Reference No. 339 of
2008.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties.
3. Mr. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
Acquiring Body raises only a ground that the learned Reference
Court has granted interest under Section 28 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, from the date of notifcation under Section
4 of the Act of 1894, whereas, as per well settled principle of law
as laid down in a Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in a
case of State of Maharashtra Versus Kailash Shiva
Rangari1, it should be from the date of Award. He, therefore,
submits that the impugned Judgment and Award needs
modifcation to that extent.
4. Mr. Khadap, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-
claimant is not disputing above referred legal position and he has
no objection to allow the present appeal to the extent of
modifying the clause (4) of the operative part of the Judgment to
the extent that the interest granted by the learned Reference
Court, "from the date of notifcation" should be "from the date of
Award".
1 2016(4) ALL MR 513 (F.B.)
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2021 05:07:10 :::
3 935-FA-1950-20.odt
5. In that view of the matter, as the above issue is no more
res-integra and as it has already been held in the Judgment of
State of Maharashtra Versus Kailash Shiva Rangari
(supra), I am of the opinion that the present appeal needs to be
partly allowed. Accordingly, I pass the following order -
ORDER
(I) The appeal is partly allowed.
(II) The clause (4) of the operative part of the Judgment
and Award dated 07-11-2014 passed by the learned
Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmananbad, in Land
Acquisition Reference No. 339 of 2008, is modifed,
and, it is held that the claimant is entitled for the
interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, from the date of Award, for the frst year
@ 9% per annum and for the subsequent period
@ 15% per annum till realization of the entire amount
of the Award.
(III) Since the appeal is disposed of in above terms, the
claimant is permitted to withdraw the amount
deposited by the appellant in this Court along with
interest accrued, if any, thereon.
(IV) No order as to costs.
(V) In view of disposal of the appeal, Civil Applications No.
2676 of 2021 and 11040 of 2019 are also disposed of.
( ANIL S. KILOR )
JUDGE
rrd
