Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 12085 Bom
Judgement Date : 30 August, 2021
1 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1732 OF 2018
Nagnath Amruta Jadhav
Age - 65 yrs. Occ - Agri.,
R/o Dadgi, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur ... Appellant
(Orig. Claimant)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur,
District Latur
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Land Acquisition Officer,
Udgir, Tq. Udgir Dist. Latur
3. The Tahsildar Nilanga
Tq. Nilanga Dist. Latur ... Respondents
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1733 OF 2018
Mahada s/o Mudhappa Boyane
died (through L R's)
Gundaji s/o Mahada Boyane
died (through L R's)
Prakash Gundaji Boyane
Age - 58 yrs. Occ - Agri.
R/o Dadgi Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur ... Appellant
(Orig. Claimant)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur,
District Latur
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Land Acquisition Officer,
Udgir, Tq. Udgir Dist. Latur
1 of 8
::: Uploaded on - 30/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2021 03:38:49 :::
2 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
3. The Tahsildar Nilanga
Tq. Nilanga Dist. Latur ... Respondents
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1734 OF 2018
Ram s/o Dhondiba Boyane
Age: 45 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o: Dadgi, Tq. Nilanga,
Dist. Latur ... Appellant
(Orig. Claimant)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur,
District Latur
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Land Acquisition Officer,
Udgir, Tq. Udgir Dist. Latur
3. The Tahsildar Nilanga
Tq. Nilanga Dist. Latur ... Respondents
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1735 OF 2018
Nagnath S/o Gyana Boyane
Age - 65 yrs. Occ - Agri.,
R/o. Dadgi Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur ... Appellant
(Orig. Claimant)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur,
District Latur
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Land Acquisition Officer,
Udgir, Tq. Udgir Dist. Latur
2 of 8
::: Uploaded on - 30/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2021 03:38:49 :::
3 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
3. The Tahsildar Nilanga
Tq. Nilanga Dist. Latur ... Respondents
FIRST APPEAL NO. 1736 OF 2018
Santram s/o Gyanna Boyane
(Died) through his L.R.
Shahuraj s/o Santram Boyane,
Age - 52 yrs. Occ - Agri.,
R/o. Dadgi, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur ... Appellant
(Orig. Claimant)
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Collector, Latur,
District Latur
2. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Land Acquisition Officer,
Udgir, Tq. Udgir Dist. Latur
3. The Tahsildar Nilanga
Tq. Nilanga Dist. Latur ... Respondents
....
Mr. Shashikiran N. Patil, Advocate for appellants
Shri P. M. Kulkarni, AGP for respondents
....
CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT, J.
RESERVED ON : 02nd AUGUST, 2021 PRONOUNCED ON : 30th AUGUST, 2021
J U D G M E N T :-
. These First Appeals are admitted and taken up for final
hearing with the consent of learned Advocates for the parties.
3 of 8
4 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
2. All these appeals are being decided by this common
judgment, since common questions of facts and law arise therein.
3. The challenge in these appeals is to the award(s) dated
10.01.2011, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division,
Nilanga in respective Land Acquisition References (LARs), granting
enhancement in amount of compensation offered by the Special
Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO). The appellants, in fact, did not
prefer these appeals within limitation. There was delay of little over
seven years in preferring these appeals. This Court has, vide orders
dated 19.09.2017, condoned the delay. The appellants herein have
based their challenge on the ground of parity.
4. Shri S. N. Patil, learned Advocate for the appellants,
would submit that the lands belonging to the appellants herein along
with other adjacent lands, were acquired for rehabilitation of village
Dadgi. The acquisition took place pursuant to one and the same
notification published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act
(for short 'the Act') All the land owners preferred LARs. Some of
which, came to be decided independently. LAR No.15 of 2000 is one
of such matters. The same was allowed granting compensation with
4 of 8
5 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
per square feet rate. The respondent - State had preferred appeals
against the judgment and award passed in LAR No. 15 of 2000 along
with condonation of delay applications. This Court, vide order dated
30.09.2014, rejected the applications for condonation of delay. Thus,
the award granting compensation with per square feet rate attained
finality. The appellants herein, are similarly placed. Therefore, they
deserve to be granted compensation at the rate granted by the
Reference Court in LAR No. 15 of 2000. The learned Advocate relied
on the judgment of this Court in the case of Arvind Sukha Acharya
vs Special Land Acquisition Officer and another - 2011 (5) Bom.C.R.
692 and the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
the case of Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (Dead) through LRs vs. The
Special Land Acquisition Officer and another in Civil Appeal
No.9415 of 2019 and in the case of Murali Alias Dhananjayan vs.
State of Kerala in Civil Appeal No. 138 of 2012.
5. The learned AGP would, on the other hand, submit that
the appellants have approached this Court very late. They cannot
claim parity with the claimants in LAR No.15 of 2000. He, therefore,
urged for dismissal of the appeals.
5 of 8
6 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
6. I have perused the impugned awards to find the
appellants to have had placed reliance on the judgment and award
passed in LAR No.15 of 2000. The learned Reference Court observed
as under:-
"12. The learned counsel of the claimants have relied upon a decision passed by Reference Court in L.A.R. No.15/2000 decided on 03.05.2008. On perusal of the judgment below Exh.29 relied upon by the claimants, it appears to me that the judgment is delivered on the basis of sale-deed below Exh.36 in respect of land situated in village Dadgi. The sale instance below Exh.36 is appears to be executed in respect of house with plot, which clearly appears to me that it is not suitable and comparable sale instance to determine the market price. Therefore, it is not safe to rely upon the judgment for determination of market price. Therefore, I discard it for determination of market price."
7. In the case of Arvind Sukha Acharya (supra), in para 3,
it has been observed thus:
"The learned Single Judge, held on the reliance of the judgment of the Apex Court in several cases including the case of (M/s. Printers House Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mst. Saiyadan (deceased) by LRs & others) 2, reported in 1993 DGLS (soft) 886 : 1994 S.C. 1160, where the Supreme Court has held as follows:-
If Comparable Sales Method of Valuation of Land is adopted for determining the market-value of an acquired plot of land, it generally holds good for determination of the market-value of several acquired plots of land if the acquisition of all such plots of land is made pursuant to the same preliminary Notification.
6 of 8
7 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
4. Since the survey numbers in both the appeals relate to the lands acquired under proceeding of the same preliminary notification, I see no reason to award a different rate of compensation from the rate awarded in the earlier case under the same notification. Accordingly, the compensation in both the cases is enhanced from 4/- per square metre to 21/- per square metre, but, excluding the values of trees, fruits and statutory allowances."
8. Admittedly, the lands belonging to the appellants have
been acquired for rehabilitation of village Dadgi. The lands subject
matter of LAR No.15 of 2000, were the land adjacent to the lands
belonging to the appellants herein and have also been acquired for
the same purpose. The notification issued under Section 4 of the Act
in respect of all those lands, is one and the same. The appellants
herein, are therefore, entitled to have compensation at the rate
granted by the Reference Court in LAR No. 15 of 2000. In view of
the same, the appeals are allowed in terms of the following order:
ORDER
(i) All the First Appeals are allowed.
(ii) The appellants be granted compensation at the rate
Rs.5/- per square feet, as has been awarded/calculated
in terms of para 31(1) of the award dated 03.05.2008
7 of 8
8 FA-1732 to 1736-2018.doc
passed in LAR No.15 of 2000, subject to variation in
area of the lands belonging to the appellants.
(iii) The appellants, however, shall not be entitled to
interest for the period from the date of impugned
award in the LAR i.e. from 10.01.2011 to 31.03.2020,
since after condonation of delay vide order dated
19.09.2017. The appellants could have circulated these
matters for relief.
(iv) Rest of the terms of the impugned award to stand
unaltered.
(v) The State shall deposit the amount under the award
within a period of ten weeks from today.
[ R. G. AVACHAT, J. ]
SMS
8 of 8
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!