Bombay High Court
V.I.D.C. Thr Its Exe. Eng. Bembla ... vs Santosh Sukhanand Jawade And ... on 2 September, 2021
Bench: Pushpa V. Ganediwala
fa932.10.odt 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
FIRST APPEAL NO. 932 OF 2010
Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation,
through its Executive Engineer, Bembla Project
Division, Taq. & Dist. Yavatmal.
...APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. Santosh s/o Sukhanand Jawade,
Aged : Major, Occ. Cultivator,
R/o L-83, Quarter No.44, Vidarbha
Housing Society, Bajoriya Nagar,
Yavatmal, Distt. Yavatmal.
2. The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Collector, Yavatmal.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Bembla Project, Yavatmal.
...RESPONDENTS
WITH
CROSS OBJECTION NO. 35 OF 2011
Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation,
through its Executive Engineer, Bembla Project
Division, Taq. & Dist. Yavatmal.
...APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. Santosh s/o Sukhanand Jawade,
Aged : 62 years, Occ. Cultivator,
R/o L-83, Quarter No.44, Vidarbha
Housing Society, Bajoriya Nagar,
Yavatmal, Distt. Yavatmal. ...CROSS OBJECTOR
2. The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Collector, Yavatmal.
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2021 13:44:40 :::
fa932.10.odt 2
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Bembla Project, Yavatmal.
...RESPONDENTS
..........................................................................................
Shri A.B. Patil, Advocate for the appellant in First Appeal No.932/2010
and for respondent No.1 in Cross Objection No.35/2011.
Shri S.V. Ingole, Advocate for respondent No.1 in First Appeal
No.932/2010 and for the cross-objector in Cross Objection No.35/2011.
Ms. Shamsi Haider, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
..........................................................................................
CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 02, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Heard.
2. Shri Ingole, learned counsel for the claimant/
cross-objector submits that the instant Appeal and the Cross
Objection can be decided as the issue involved in the instant
Appeal is covered by the judgment delivered by this Court in
the case of Ashok s/o Uttamchand Kotecha (Since dead) thr.
LRs Savita wd/o Ashok Kotecha & Ors. Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & Ors. [First Appeal No. 399/2011] & Anr.
connected matter. He submits that in the said Appeal, this
Court has enhanced the compensation for the subject land
@ Rs.2,10,000/- per hectare against the compensation
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2021 13:44:40 :::
fa932.10.odt 3
which was enhanced by the Reference Court @ Rs.1,75,000/-
per hectare. He further submits that the subject land in the
present Appeal and the Cross Objection is similarly situated
with the land which was acquired in the aforecited First
Appeal, i.e., First Appeal No. 399/2011 & anr. connected
matter as both the lands are situated at Village Barad, Tal.
Babulgaon, District Yavatmal and was acquired under the
notification dated 24/07/2003 issued under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
3. I have perused the record with the assistance of
learned both the counsel. I am satisfied that the subject land in
the instant Appeal so also the lands which were acquired in the
aforesaid Appeals are similarly situated.
4. In this view of the matter, I do not see any good
reason to take a different view, as the issue involved in the
instant Appeal is already covered in the aforesaid Appeals.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following order :
::: Uploaded on - 08/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2021 13:44:40 :::
fa932.10.odt 4
ORDER
i. First Appeal stands dismissed.
ii. Cross Objection stands partly allowed.
iii. The compensation for the lands of the claimant
admeasuring 1.82 H.R out of Gat No.84 and land admeasuring
0.81 H.R. out of Gat No.88, situated at Village Barad, Tal.
Babulgaon, District Yavatmal, is determined @ Rs.2,10,000/-
per hectare. This amount shall be paid by the acquiring body
to the claimant with all statutory benefits.
iv. If the amount of compensation has not been
deposited by the acquiring body, the same shall be deposited
within a period of five months with the Registry of this Court.
On such deposit, the claimant/ cross-objector is entitled to
withdraw the same, subject to payment of deficit Court fee.
JUDGE
Wagh
