The State Of Mah And Ors vs Ramdas Supudu Bhil, Died Thr. L.R. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10733 Bom

                                        (1)                              1041-fa-1148-2016



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                  FIRST APPEAL NO.1148 OF 2016
              WITH CA/11945/2012 IN FA/1148/2016

                  THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
                            VERSUS
         RAMDAS SUPUDU BHIL, DIED THR. L.R. KAMLIBAI

                        ...
 Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Appellants.
                                              ...

                                     CORAM : S. G. DIGE, J.

                                      DATED : 14th OCTOBER, 2022.

 PER COURT:-

 1.               Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the
 judgment          and         Award    passed      by     the      learned          Civil
 Judge,           Senior             Division,       Shahada            (for         short
 'Reference              Court')              appellant/orig.            Respondents
 preferred this Appeal.


 2.               It      is     the          contention       of      the       learned
 counsel           for         the      appellants           that,          lands            of
 respondent/orig.                    claimant      admeasuring             0.22R         was
 acquired for Kolhapuri Bandhara.                              The Special Land
 Acquisition             Officer         had      awarded       compensation                 of
 Rs.80,000/-               per        hector,       whereas           the        learned
 Reference Court has enhanced it at Rs.1,40,000/-
 per hector, which is excessive.                            The sale instances
 on which the learned Reference Court is relied are
 from       different            villages.           The       learned           counsel
 further submits that, additional compensation of
 Rs.25,000/-                   has      been       granted            beyond             the



::: Uploaded on - 17/10/2022                             ::: Downloaded on - 18/10/2022 07:06:24 :::
                                        (2)                                1041-fa-1148-2016



 jurisdiction and for no reasons.                               Hence, requested
 to allow the appeal.


 3.               Though respondent is served, none appears
 for the respondent.


 4.               I     have     heard         learned         counsel          for       the
 appellants.              Perused the judgment and order passed
 by the learned Reference Court.


 5.               It      is     the         contention         of      the       learned
 counsel            for        the      appellants             that,          excessive
 compensation              is    awarded           to    the    respondent/orig.
 claimant.            The Special Land Acquisition Officer has
 awarded Rs.80,000/- per hector, whereas the learned
 Reference Court has enhanced it to Rs.1,40,000/-
 per hector.               It is within two times.                        The learned
 Reference Court while enhancing the compensation
 has       observed            that,         the    sale        instances             dated
 15.10.1992 and 30.10.1992 were of Rs.2,80,487/- and
 Rs.2,75,000/- per hector.                          The land of claimant is
 Bagayati             land      and     on      that      basis         the       learned
 Reference             Court         has      enhanced          the        amount             to
 Rs.1,40,000/- per hector.                          I do not find infirmity
 in it.           The learned Reference Court has observed
 that the claimant is entitled for Rs.25,000/- as
 compensation, but in operative part of order, the
 said amount has not been considered.                                      Hence, the
 appeal is devoid of merit.                             Moreover, the enhanced
 compensation is within two times.                                   Hence, I pass
 following order:



::: Uploaded on - 17/10/2022                              ::: Downloaded on - 18/10/2022 07:06:24 :::
                                (3)                           1041-fa-1148-2016



                                     ORDER

A. Appeal is dismissed.

B. No order as to costs.

6. In view of dismissal of the First Appeal, the present Civil Application is disposed of.

(S. G. DIGE) JUDGE

Devendra/October-2022