Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 7265 Bom
Judgement Date : 5 May, 2021
1 36-FA-594-05.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.594 OF 2005
WITH CA/11003/2006 IN FA/594/2005
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Tapi Project-2, Hatnoor, Jalgaon.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Waghur Project, Jalgaon. .. Appellants
Versus
Pandit Tukaram Dhangar
Age : Major, Occu.: Agril.,
R/o. Shingayat, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon. .. Respondent
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.595 OF 2005
WITH CA/11004/2006 IN FA/595/2005
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Tapi Project-3, Hatnoor, Jalgaon.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Waghur Project, Jalgaon .. Appellants
Versus
Pandurang Dhondu Patil,
Age: Major, Occu.: Agriculture,
R/o Shingayat, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon. .. Respondent
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.596 OF 2005
WITH CA/10995/2006 IN FA/596/2005
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Upper Tapi Project-3, Hatnoor,
Jalgaon.
::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 10:23:04 :::
2 36-FA-594-05.odt
2. The Executive Engineer,
Waghur Project, Jalgaon. .. Appellants
Versus
1. Chindnu Sonji Patil (Died)
Through his L.Rs.
1/1. Eknath Chindhu Patil
1/2. Ragnath Chindhu Patil
1/3. Anjanabai w/o Chindhu Patil
1/4. Bhagabai w/o Pandit Patil
1/5. Vishwanath Chindhu Patil
1/6. Dinkar Chindhu Patil (Deceased)
Through His L.Rs.
2. Indubai w/o Dinkar Patil
3. Manisha w/o Vijay Patil
4. Ashok Dinkar Patil
5. Ganesh Dinkar Patil,
All Age Major, Occu. Agril. R/o. Shingayat,
Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon. .. Respondents
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.597 OF 2005
WITH CA/11008/2006 IN FA/597/2005
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Tapi Project-3, Hatnoor, Jalgaon.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Waghur Project, Jalgaon. .. Appellants
Versus
Dwarkabai w/o Tapiram Patil (Deceased)
Through her L.Rs.
1. Sitaram Papiram Patil, Age 55 years.
2. Deokabai w/o Narayan Patil, Age 60 years.
3. Rahiyabai w/o Pralhad Patil, Age 52 years.
4. Atmaram Tapiram Patil, Age 45 years,
5. Tulshiram Tapiram Patil, Age 43 years,
6. Sarubai Tulshiram Patil, Age 41 years.
All Occupation Agril., R/o. Shingayat,
Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon. .. Respondents
::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/09/2021 10:23:04 :::
3 36-FA-594-05.odt
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO.598 OF 2005
WITH CA/11001/2006 IN FA/598/2005
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Tapi Project-3, Hatnoor, Jalgaon.
2. The Executive Engineer,
Waghur Project, Jalgaon. .. Appellants
Versus
1. Chindhu Sonji Patil (Deceased)
Through his LR's
1/1. Eknath Chindhu Patil
1/2. Ragnath Chindhu Patil
1/3. Anjanabai w/o Chindhu Patil
1/4. Bhagabai w/o Pandit Patil
1/5. Vishwanath Chindhu Patil
1/6. Dinkar Chindhu Patil (Deceased)
Through His LR's.
2. Indubai w/o Dinkar Patil
3. Manisha w/o Vijay Patil
4. Ashok Dinkar Patil
5. Ganesh Dinkar Patil,
All Age Major, Occu. Agril.,
R/o. Shingayat,Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon. .. Respondents
...
Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Appellants
Mr. A. B. Kale, Advocate for Respondents-claimants
...
CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.
DATE : 5th MAY, 2021 ORAL ORDER :-
At the outset, Mr. A. B. Kale, learned counsel for the respondents- claimants submits that the issue involved in these appeals stand settled by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer (III), Jalgaon and another Versus Bhagwat Vithal
4 36-FA-594-05.odt
Sonwane1, where in respect of acquisition for the very same Waghur Project, the Division Bench has approved the very rates now granted by the Reference court in the impugned Judgment and award. Therefore, he submits that by adopting the reasoning in the case of Bhagwat Vithal Sonwane (supra), these appeals are also liable to be dismissed.
2. The learned AGP is not disputing the said position.
3. In view of aforesaid submission, since this Court has already passed the Judgment and order in the connected matters long back and it was not challenged in the Apex Court.
4. In that view of the matter, it would not be appropriate to take different view, which was taken by the same Judgment, and accordingly, I adopt the same view.
5. Accordingly, these first appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
6. In view of the disposal of first appeals, nothing further survives for consideration in pending civil applications, the same stand disposed of, accordingly.
( ANIL S. KILOR ) JUDGE
rrd
1 2009(4) Mh.L.J. 308
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!