Bombay High Court
The State Of Maharashtra vs Shivaji Annabhau Phapal And ... on 28 April, 2021
Bench: Anil S. Kilor
fa544.03+
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.544 OF 2003
The State of Maharashtra,
...APPELLANT
(Orig. Respondent)
VERSUS
1) Shivaji S/o Annabhau Phapal,
Age-33 years,
2) Abhimanu S/o Annabhau Phapal,
Age-38 years,
3) Shalan W/o Shivaji Phapal,
Age-38 years,
All by Occu:Agri. R/o Belura,
Taluka-Majalgaon, Dist-Beed.
...RESPONDENTS
(Orig. Applicant)
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.549 OF 2003
The State of Maharashtra,
...APPELLANT
(Orig. Respondent)
VERSUS
Champabai W/o Chandrabhan Phapal,
Age-50 years, Occu:Household and Agril.,
R/o-Belura, Taluka-Majalgaon,
District-Beed.
...RESPONDENT
(Orig. Applicant)
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:56 :::
fa544.03+
2
...
Mr.B.V. Virdhe, A.G.P. for Appellant in both Appeals.
None present for Respondents though served.
...
CORAM: ANIL S. KILOR, J.
DATE : 28th APRIL, 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. These are the appeals arising out of common
Judgment and award dated 2nd May 1991 passed by the IInd
Additional District Judge, Beed in Land Acquisition Reference
No. 38 of 1988, Land Acquisition Reference No. 39 of 1988 and
Land Acquisition Reference No. 40 of 1988, enhancing the
compensation from Rs.85/- per R to Rs.375/- per R, towards
land acquired.
2. In these appeals, lands in question are situated at
village Belura, Taluka-Majalgaon, District-Beed and the same
were acquired for the purpose of construction of distributory at
R.D. 18300 on M.R.B.C. at village Belura, Taluka-Majalgaon. The
notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was
issued on 3rd October 1985 and the award was passed on
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:56 :::
fa544.03+
3
2nd December 1987. The Special Land Acquisition Officer
awarded Rs.85/- per R, whereas in the Reference filed by the
claimants under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the
Reference Court has enhanced it to Rs.375/- per R.
3. I have heard learned AGP appearing for the appellant
- State. None for the claimants.
4. The learned AGP opposed the enhancement of
amount of compensation on the ground that the same is
exorbitant.
5. He further submits that grant of interest under
Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act from the date of
possession is contrary to the Judgment of the Full Bench of this
Court in a case of State of Maharashtra vs. Kailash Shiva
Rangari1 .
6. To consider the contentions of the learned AGP, I
have gone through the record and proceedings and also perused
the Judgment and award. It is clear from the record that learned
Reference Court, while enhancing the amount of compensation,
1 2016(4) ALL MR 513 (F.B.)
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:56 :::
fa544.03+
4
has considered oral as well as documentary evidence available
on record and also the sale instances, contrary to which nothing
has been brought on record or pointed out by the learned AGP in
these matters.
7. Hence in absence of any contrary evidence and more
particularly, in view of the fact that the learned Reference Court
has determined the amount of compensation after considering
the relevant factors as per well settled principles of law, I do not
find any error committed by the learned Reference Court in
these matters.
8. However, the Judgment and award requires to be
modified to the extent of the amount of interest under Section
28 of the Land Acquisition Act which is granted from the date of
possession, whereas it should have been from the date of award
as per the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in a case of
State of Maharashtra vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari, (supra).
9. Accordingly, the present appeals need to be partly
allowed, as under:-
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 06:30:56 :::
fa544.03+
5
ORDER
(I) The appeals are partly allowed.
(II) The clause (3) of the operative part of the
Judgment and award dated 2 nd May 1991 passed by
the IInd Additional District Judge, Beed in Land
Acquisition Reference No. 38 of 1988 and Land
Acquisition Reference No.40 of 1988 is modified, and
it is held that the claimants are entitled for the
interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, from the date of Award. For the first year the
interest would be at the rate of 9% per annum and
for the subsequent period it would be at the rate of
15% per annum till realization of the entire amount
of the Award.
(III) No order as to costs.
(IV) Pending civil applications are disposed of.
[ANIL S. KILOR, J.]
asb/APR21
