SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS – Appellant
Versus
BHIMDEO RATTU RATHOD AND ORS – Respondent
FA 3420/2018



Advocates:
['GOVT PLEADER', 'V D GUNALE', '', 'ADV V G GUNALE', 'BUT CAVT FILED ONLY']

1

First Appeals 3420 n 3421 of 2018.odt

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

FIRST APPEAL NO. 3420 OF 2018

1.

The State of Maharashtra,

Through its District Collector,

Aurangabad.

2.

The Special Land Acquisition Officer,

Jayakwadi Project Division No.1,

Aurangabad.

3.

The Executive Engineer,

Minor Irrigation Division No.1,

Aurangabad, District Aurangabad.

… APPELLANTS

(Original Opponents)

V E R S U S

1.

Bhimdeo s/o Rattu Rathod

Age: 28 years,

2.

Megha Rattu

3.

Neelabai w/o Rattu

All residents of Kolwadi Tanda,

Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad.

… RESPONDENTS

(Original Claimants)

AND

FIRST APPEAL NO. 3421 OF 2018

1.

The State of Maharashtra,

Through its District Collector,

Aurangabad.

2.

The Special Land Acquisition Officer,

Jayakwadi Project Division No.1,

Aurangabad.

2

First Appeals 3420 n 3421 of 2018.odt

3.

The Executive Engineer,

Minor Irrigation Division No.1,

Aurangabad, District Aurangabad.

… APPELLANTS

(Original Opponents)

V E R S U S

Pandu Haru Mamtibai w/o Haru,

Age-48 Yrs, Occu. Agril.,

Resident of Kolwadi Tanda,

Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad.

… RESPONDENT

(Original Claimant)

…

Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Appellants.

Mr. Vikas G. Kodale, h/f Mr. V. D. Gunale, Advocate for

Respondents/Original Claimants.

...

CORAM

: SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.

RESERVED ON

: 29th November, 2021

PRONOUNCED ON : 09th March, 2022

JUDGMENT:

.

The State has preferred these two appeals feeling

aggrieved by the common impugned judgment and award passed by

the Reference Court in LAR No.05 of 2013 and LAR No.06 of 2013

under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter

referred to as the “said Act” for the sake of convenience). Both

appeals can be disposed of by common judgment.

3

First Appeals 3420 n 3421 of 2018.odt

2

The following factual scenario would cover the dispute in

narrow compass:

1)

Name of the Village :-

Kolwadi Tanda, Taluka Kannad,

District Aurangabad.

2)

Gat Number

Acquired Area

301

1 H 56 R

301

1 H 98 R

301

2 H 00 R

3)

Date of Notification U/s. 4 of L.A. Act

Date: 31-7-1995

published in Mah. Gov. Gazette

4)

Date of Notice U/s.4 of L.A. Act received

Date: 02-4-1998

by the claimants.

5)

Date of possession of the land taken

Date: 09-4-1996

by the Ex. Engg. by private negotiation

6)

Date of Award U/sec. 11

Date 25-7-2000

7)

Date on which Notice of the award u/s.

Date: 22-1-2001

12(2) received by the claimants.

8)

Date of payment of compensation

Date: 24-1-2001

The lands were acquired for minor irrigation project.

3

In LAR No.05 of 2013, the Special Land Acquisition

Officer was pleased to fix the market price at the rate of Rs.59,400/-

for 1 H 98 R classifying it as Jirayat land (Rs.300/- per R). The

Reference Court enhanced the same at Rs.2,500/- per R. In LAR

No.06 of 2013, the Special Land Acquisition Officer was pleased to

award the compensation at the rate of Rs.3,750/- per R thereby

determining the valuation of the acquired land at Rs.2,85,000/- apart

from valuation of trees.

4

First Appeals 3420 n 3421 of 2018.odt

4

Heard Mr. Virdhe, AGP for Appellants/State and Mr. Vikas

Kodale, holding for Mr. V. D. Gunale, learned counsel for respondents/

original claimants.

5

Mr. Virdhe, learned AGP invited my attention to the

impugned judgment paragraphs 19 to 24. He submitted that the

original claimants have placed on record two sale instances in support

of their claim for enhancement of compensation. One sale instance is

of dated 15th April, 1997 for 4 R land, which cannot be taken into

consideration as a base to determine the compensation. The

Reference Court has also observed to that effect in paragraph 21 and

not acted upon. He further pointed out that the second sale instance

is of dated 22nd April, 1998 for 20 R land for consideration of

Rs.50,000/-. He submitted that Section 4 notification came to be

published in the Government Gazette on 31st July, 1997 and public

notice u

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top