[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Narayan Ramchandra Boharupi vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through The ... on 16 February, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:2702
1/5 17-fa 33-15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
FIRST APPEAL NO.33 OF 2015
Narayan Ramchandra Boharupi, APPELLANTS:
Aged about 60 yrs., (Original Petition on
Occ.Labour, R/o Karajgaon R.A.).
(Gandhighar), Tq. Warud,
Dist.Amravati.
-Versus-
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Collector,
Amravati Camp, Amravati.
2. Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Upper Wardha Project
No.4, Collector's Compound,
Amravati.Tq. And District
Amravati.
3 Executive Engineer, Amravati RESPONDENTS
Irrigation Divisioin, Amravati (Original Respondents
Tq. and Dist. Amravati. on R.A.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.D.P.Dapurkar, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr.U.R.Phasate, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
Mr.M.A.Kadu, Advocate for respondent No.3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATED : 16.02.2026.
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1) This is an Appeal under Section 54 of the Land
Kavita.
2/5 17-fa 33-15
Acquisition Act, 1894 by the Original Claimants for
enhanced compensation towards the 358 Orange Trees,
which were on the acquired land. The Appellant's land
admeasuring 0.1 H 16R situated at Mouja Karajgaon Tq.
Warud, District Amravati came to be acquired for the 'Loni
Dhawalgiri project. The Section 4 Notification was issued
on 24.01.2004. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
declared the Award on 25.04.2006 awarding the
compensation of Rs.2,063/- per Orange Tree. The
Appellant preferred the Reference under Section 18 of the
Land Acquisition Act and led necessary evidence. The
learned Reference Court by the judgment and award dated
24.10.2013 in LAC No.215 of 2007 granted the
compensation of Rs.17,191/- towards the acquired land and
Rs. 2,28,888/- towards the Orange Trees by considering the
rate of Rs. 2,702/- per Orange Tree.
2) It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the
Appellant that, the Appellant is not pressing for
enhancement towards the acquired land. He submits that,
the Appeal is restricted to enhancement in the
Kavita.
3/5 17-fa 33-15
compensation for the Orange Trees. He submits that, the
Appellant examined the expert, who visited the spot and
valued per Orange Tree at Rs. 4096/-. He submits that, the
Claimant was entitled for Rs.5000/- per tree. He submits
that the Appellant had brought on record the report of
APMC (Warud), which was for the year 2004-05. He
submits that the Appeal be considered for enhancement in
the compensation for the Orange Trees.
3) The learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body
opposes the Appeal. He submits that the report of APMC
(Warud) was of the subsequent year and therefore, cannot
be applied in the case at hand, wherein Section 4
Notification was of January-2004. He submits that the
learned Reference Court, on the basis of evidence available
on record has rightly considered the rate of per Orange
Trees and therefore, no interference is called for in the
Judgment of learned Reference Court.
4) With the assistance of learned Advocate for both the
sides, I have gone through the papers. The Appellant had
examined the valuer 'Dadan Harbaji Borkar'. The valuer
Kavita.
4/5 17-fa 33-15
accepted in his cross-examination that, he had not issued
any certificate from either by the State Government or by
the Central Government showing him as an expert. His
evidence shows that, he visited the spot on 30.05.2006,
which was admittedly two(2) years after Section 4
Notification. His evidence further shows that, there was no
reference of fruits on the trees in his valuation report. The
learned Reference Court discarded his testimony on the
basis of admission that, he had not enclosed his rough notes
at the time of visit. As it is clear from evidence of the valuer
examined by the Appellant, that the report was post two (2)
years of Section 4 Notification, the appropriate
enhancement would be 80% of the rate calculated by the
valuer, which come to Rs.3200/- per tree. The learned
Advocate for the Appellant fairly agrees for the said
enhanced rate. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
i) The Appeal is partly allowed;
ii) The Award passed by the learned Reference Court
dated 24.10.2013 in LAC No.215 of 2007 stands modified
Kavita.
5/5 17-fa 33-15
to the extent of the rate for the Orange Trees .
iii) The Appellant shall be entitled for the enhanced rate
of Rs.3200/- per Orange Tree for 358 Orange Trees.
iv) The total amount of enhanced compensation for the
said Orange Trees be accordingly calculated. Difference of
amount towards the enhanced compensation for the Orange
Trees shall be deposited within a period of four (4) months
by the acquiring body.
v) The statutory benefits be computed accordingly.
vi) The Appeal stands disposed of.
vii) The Record and Proceedings be sent back to the
learned Reference Court.
( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.)
Signed by: Kavita P Tayade
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 16/02/2026 20:18:03
Kavita.
