fa572.98- -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 912 FIRST APPEAL NO. 572 OF 1998 M.S.E.B. through the Executive Engineer, Bhusawal VERSUS Ramdas Shamrao Pawar And Anr ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad AGP for Respondent No.2: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar Advocate for Respondent Nos.1-A to 1-D : Mr. Shubham Shinde ….. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 580 OF 1998 M.S.E.B. through the Executive Engineer, Jalgaon VERSUS Shamrao Mango Suralkar And Anr. ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad AGP for Respondent No.2: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar ….. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 3946 OF 2016 M.S.E.B. through the Executive Engineer, Jalgaon VERSUS Sona Pira Sonwane and others ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad AGP for Respondent Nos.2 and 3: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar ….. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1037 OF 2020 M.S.E.B. through the Executive Engineer, Jalgaon VERSUS Mathabai Goba Patil and others ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Vijay Y. Patil AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar Advocate for Respondents-claimants : Ms. Sakshi Kale h/f Mr. A.B. Kale ….. 2026:BHC-AUG:7990 fa572.98- -2- CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATED : 20th FEBRUARY, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. All these appeals are preferred against the judgments and award passed by the learned Land Reference Court, Jalgaon, as per the following chart:- Sr. No. First appeal No. L.A.R. No. Date of judgment 1 572 of 1998 117 of 1993 30.09.1997 2 580 of 1998 220 of 1993 30.09.1997 3 3946 of 2016 183 of 1993 21.04.1998 4 1037 of 2020 224 of 1993 21.04.1998 2. The learned advocates for the appellants, in the respective appeals, submitted that the amount of compensation is not properly determined by the learned Reference Court and exorbitant amount of compensation is awarded. The evidence was not properly appreciated and therefore, interference is warranted in the impugned judgments and award. 3. The learned A.G.P. for the respondent State and advocate for the respondents-claimants strongly opposed the appeals and submitted that there is no substance in the grounds of objections raised in the appeals. It is submitted that the learned Reference Court has rightly determined the amount of compensation as per the market value of the acquired fa572.98- -3- land as per the notification issued/published under Section 4of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, dated 19.09.1996. There is no substance in the grounds of objections raised in the appeals. The appeals therefore, deserve to be dismissed. It is lastly prayed to dismiss the appeals. 4. Perused the pleadings, evidence, grounds of objections in the appeals and the reasons and findings in the impugnment judgments and award of the learned Reference Court. The learned Reference Court determined the market value of the acquired houses by considering the sale exemplar Exh.25 and the valuation report. The valuer has deposed before the learned Reference Court and also proved the valuer’s report at Exh.30. The learned Reference Court has rightly evaluated the evidence and came to the right conclusion. Furthermore, it is pointed out that in similarly situated case i.e. first appeal No. 573 of 1998 and other connected appeals, it was submitted on behalf of the learned advocate for the appellants, Mr. H.T. Joshi, for the appellants therein to withdraw those appeals. The withdrawal was allowed and the appeals were disposed of on 04.04.2007. On this count also, this Court finds that there is no substance in the objection of appeals and the appeals therefore, disposed of as sans merit. The appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/