LSP 1 10 fa 652.98.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION First Appeal No. 652 of 1998 The State of Maharashtra … Appellant Versus Shri Ramdas Chandrarao More and anr. … Respondents Mr.A.R. Patil Addl.G.P. for the Appellant. Mr. P.N.Joshi Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J DATE : 27th August 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Additional Government Pleader for the State and Mr. Joshi, learned Advocate for the Respondents. 2. As recorded in the order dated 13th August 2026, learned AGP has taken instructions about the connection in between the decision in First Appeal No.649/1998 decided on 7th February 2025 and present appeal by the State Government. It is submitted to pass appropriate orders. 3. Learned Advocate Joshi for the Respondents have invited my attention to the following observations: (i) Para No.10 of the Reference Court Award which deals with the report given by the Executive Engineer about existence of LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date: 2026.08.28 16:00:03 +0530 LSP 2 10 fa 652.98.doc pipeline and compensation. (ii) Rate enhanced by the Reference Court on Page No.22 of the Award which refers to land value, trees, structure/well. 4. His submission is there is no specific ground taken in the appeal memo for wrongly granting compensation for structure/well. Whereas according to learned AGP even though the facts of this appeal and facts of disposed of appeal may be having similarity but in the L.A.R. No.18/1995 there is no evidence about existence of the structure/well. So issue is limited as to grant of compensation for the said structure. 5. When Court has gone through the record and proceedings, every record is not available. What is available is only the reference application made by the Claimant in L.A.R.No.18/1995, some 7/12 extract and pursis thereby adopting the evidence adduced in L.A.R. No.369/1989. So Court has to decide the appeal on the basis of only available record. 6. On the basis of above circumstances, this Court will have to held that the Reference Court has valued the structure/well at Rs2,90,708/- only after going through the evidence adduced before him. Court is not giving much weightage what is pleaded or not pleaded in the appeal memo or in the reference application because if this compensation is wrongly granted, the State will have to show that it was without evidence. I am unable to subscribe to the said view. LSP 3 10 fa 652.98.doc 7. In view of that there is no merit in the appeal. Appeal is dismissed. (S.M. MODAK, J.)