[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Ghevarchand Rupchand Singawi vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Collector, ... on 16 February, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:2626
1 FA 45-2015-J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO. 45 OF 2015
Ghevarchand Rupchand Singawi
(Died on 01/07/2013) through LRs'
1. Kamlabai Wd/o Ghevarchand Singawi
Aged about 75 Years, Occu: Nil,
2. Mahendra Ghevarchand Singawi
Aged about 55 years, Occu: Agriculturist
3. Jitendra Ghevarchand Singawi,
Amended as per
Aged about 51 years, Occu: Business
Court's order All 1 to 3 R/o Dhamangaon Rly., Tq.
dated 13/06/2018 Dhamangaon Rly. District Amravati.
4. Shobha W/o Neelamchand Surana
Aged about 53 years, Occu: Household, ... Appellant
R/o 567, Ganesh Chamber, Ori. Petitioner
Ramdaspeth, Nagpur On R.A.
.. Versus ..
1. The State of Maharashtra
through the Collector, Amravati.
2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Wardha Project, Zone No.2,
Amravati, Collector's Compound,
Amravati.
3. Executive Engineer, Upper Wardha
Project No. 1, Amravati
---------------------------------------------
Amended as per
Court's order 3. VIDC through Chairman ...Respondents
dated 05/01/2026 Civil Lines, Nagpur On R.A.
2 FA 45-2015-J.odt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs.S.W. Deshpande, Advocate for appellant(s).
Shri U.R.Phasate, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2/State.
Shri P.B. Patil, Advocate for respondent no. 3.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATE OF RESERVING THE JUDGMENT : 30/01/2026
DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE JUDGMENT: 16/02/2026
JUDGMENT
This is an Appeal under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'L.A.Act') by the Claimant
against the Judgment and Order dated 11/06/2010, passed by the
learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati,
rejecting/dismissing the Claim Petition/LAC No. 160/2004.
2. The Respondents are the State, Special Land Acquisition
Officer (SLAO) and Acquiring Body. The Appellant's land
admeasuring 0.5 R, out of Gat no. 202/Survey no. 51/1-A,
situated at village Nagarwadi, Taluka Dhamangaon Railway,
District Amravati, came to be acquired for Dattapur Laghu Pat R-
1. The Notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act was issued on
15/09/2000 and the Award came to be passed by the SLAO on
24/12/2001, awarding the compensation of Rs. 32,700/- per
3 FA 45-2015-J.odt
hectare. Being dissatisfied with the compensation, the above
referred Reference came to be preferred.
3. The Acquiring Body resisted the Claim Petition by
filing Written Statement. The issues were framed by the learned
Reference Court. The Appellant led the evidence. No evidence
was led by the Respondents. Considering the material available
on record, the learned Reference Court passed the impugned
Judgment and Order.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant, the
learned AGP for Respondent nos. 1 and 2/State and the learned
counsel for Respondent no. 3 - Acquiring Body. With their
assistance, perused the papers.
(a) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Appellant
that, on earlier occasion, 0.12 R land out of the same Gat number
belonging to Claimant was acquired by the LAO for construction
of flyover for the use of National Highway by Award dated
31/12/1999, awarding the compensation of Rs. 5,13,333/- per
hectare with the statutory benefits. The Claimant preferred the
Claim Petition/LAC No. 80/2000 for enhancement in the
compensation. The learned Reference Court by the impugned
4 FA 45-2015-J.odt
Judgment and Award dated 18/01/2005 allowed the Reference
and awarded the rate of Rs. 9,30,000/- per hectare. Though the
Claimant relied on the said Judgment, the learned Reference
Court did not consider the same and observed that, the Claimant
will have to establish that, the land had the potentiality of being
used as non-agricultural land, so as to fetch the enhanced
compensation. He further submitted that, there was ample
material before the learned Reference Court indicating that, the
acquired land was having non-agricultural potentiality and
despite that, the Claim Petition is rejected. He further submitted
that, the rate which was awarded by the learned Reference Court
in the above referred earlier Claim Petition, be granted and the
Appeal be allowed.
(b) It is submitted by the learned AGP and learned counsel for
the Acquiring Body that, the learned Reference Court appreciated
the material available on record and passed the impugned
Judgment and Order. They did not dispute the above referred
Judgment in respect of part of land of the Claimant earlier
acquired and the enhanced compensation awarded therein. They
submitted that, appropriate order be passed.
5 FA 45-2015-J.odt
5. There is no dispute that, the Appellant's land
admeasuring 0.5 R out of Gat no. 202, situated at the above
referred village, came to be acquired by declaring the Award
dated 24/12/2001 passed by the SLAO and awarded the
compensation of Rs. 32,700/- per hectare. The observations in the
impugned Judgment shows that, the Claimant examined himself
as the witness and deposed that, the acquired land was at the
distance of 3 km. from Dhamangaon (Railway), there was Power
House of the State Electricity Board on the Southern side of the
land, there were residential quarters of the employees of the
Electricity Board, there was Devgaon Sugar Factory, residential
Colony and warehouse of Cotton Market Federation at the
distance of ½ km. The learned Reference Court observed that, it
is not the case of the Claimant that, there are other lands
adjoining to the suit land, which are converted to non-agricultural
use and they were used for residential purpose.
6. The observations in the impugned Judgment shows
that, heavy reliance was placed by the Claimant on the above
referred Judgment dated 18/01/2005 in LAC No. 80/2000, which
was in respect of 0.12 R land of the Claimant earlier acquired for
6 FA 45-2015-J.odt
the construction of Flyover. The learned Reference Court
observed that, the said Judgment could not be binding on it,
however, it was relevant for the subsequent cases, where the
Market Value of the land was in issue. At the same time, the
learned Reference Court observed that, the Claimant ought to
have adduced certain evidence to support his contention that, the
land was having potentiality of being used as non-agricultural
land. The learned Reference Court went on to observe that, the
enhanced rate of compensation in the aforesaid Claim Petition
was by granting 10% increase in the price of land and observed
that, the Court has not enhanced the compensation on the basis of
any sound reasoning and therefore, did not rely on the said
judgment for want of corroborative evidence.
7. Undisputedly, the said decision of the learned
Reference Court in LAC No. 80/2000, which was filed for
enhancement in the compensation towards acquisition of 0.12 R
land of the Claimant out of the same Gat number, attained
finality as the same was not challenged by the Respondents. The
certified copy of the said Judgment is on record before the
learned Reference Court in the present Reference. Perusal of the
7 FA 45-2015-J.odt
same shows that, considering the material available on record,
the learned Reference Court recorded the findings that, the
acquired land was situated within developed non-agricultural
area and enhanced rate of compensation to Rs. 9,30,000/- per
hectare against the rate of Rs. 5,13,333/- per hectare awarded by
the SLAO was granted. Observation in the said Judgment, shows
that, the said enhancement was awarded considering 10%
increase in the price of land. The observations in the impugned
Judgment that, the said Judgment in LAC no. 80/2000 was not
based on any sound reasoning, is improper and does not find
support from the said Judgment.
8. When a part of the same land was earlier acquired
and the rate of Rs. 5,13,333/- per hectare was awarded by the
SLAO, which subsequently came to be enhanced to
Rs. 9,30,000/- per hectare, rejecting/dismissing the Reference for
enhancement in compensation towards the another piece of the
same land, is not justified. When once it was observed by the
Court of competent jurisdiction that, the acquired land had the
non-agricultural potentiality and the said finding attained finality,
rejection of the present Claim Petition by observing that, there
8 FA 45-2015-J.odt
were no proper reason, cannot be accepted. As earlier the Award
for acquisition of some part of the land was of December, 1999
and the Award in the present matter is of December, 2001, 10%
escalation per year will have to be considered and accordingly,
the enhanced rate is determined at Rs. 11,25,000/- per hectare.
Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
I) The Appeal is partly allowed.
II) The impugned Judgment and Order dated 11/06/2010
passed by the learned Reference Court in Claim Petition/LAC
No. 160/2004, is quashed and set aside.
III) The Claimant shall be entitled for the compensation @
Rs. 11,25,000/- per hectare towards acquisition of 0.5 R land
under the Award dated 24/12/2001 passed by the SLAO with the
statutory benefits.
IV) There shall be no order as to cost.
V) Decree be drawn up accordingly.
VI) The Acquiring Body is expected to deposit the amount
towards enhanced compensation within a period of eight (8)
weeks from today in this Court. After deposit of amount, the
Claimant shall be permitted to withdraw the same after following
the due procedure.
9 FA 45-2015-J.odt
VII) R & P be sent back to the learned Reference Court.
VIII) Accordingly, the Appeal stands disposed of.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]
B.T.K.
Signed by: Mr. B.T. Khapekar
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 16/02/2026 16:30:40
