FA 1258/05 & anr. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 50 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1258 OF 2005 DEORAM ZIPA PATIL VERSUS SPECIAL LAND ACQ OFFICER AND ANR ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. A.B. Kale AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.N. Morampalle Advocate for Respondent 3 : Mr. S.S. Dande ... 81 X-OBJECTION NO. 288 OF 2026 IN FA/740/2012 BALIRAM MULCHAND PATIL, DIED THR. L.RS. SHRIKRISHAN AND ORS VERSUS THE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, M.I.D.C. NASHIK AND ORS ... WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 740 OF 2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11370 OF 2019 IN FA/740/2012 THE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MIDC, NASIK VERSUS BALIRAM MULCHAND PATIL, DIED THR. L.RS. SHRIKRISHAN AND ORS … Advocate for appellant/acquiring body : Mr. S.S.Dande Advocate for X-objectioner/claimant : Mr. A.B. Kale AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.D. Wange … CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : August 31, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The present appeals arises out of the Judgment and Award dated 9.8.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule in LAR No. 80/1998 and judgment and award dated 30.3.2011 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule in LAR No. 32/1998, respectively. 3. The learned counsel for the acquiring body and original claimants 2026:BHC-AUG:40622 FA 1258/05 & anr. 2 submits that the lands of the claimants were acquired from the same village, for the same public purpose i.e. M.I.D.C. Dhule, and under the same notification as involved in the First Appeal No. 1210/2012 (The Divisional Officer, M.I.D.C., Nashik Vs. Yadav Bhivsan Patil And Others) and other connected matters dated 28.7.2026. It is, therefore, contended that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment and order in FA No. 1210/12 (supra), and consequently, the present appeals deserve to be disposed of in terms thereof. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent/State fairly concedes the aforesaid position. 4. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by this Court in FA No. 1210/12 (supra), I see no reason to take a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment and order. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) First Appeal No. 740/2012 preferred by the appellant/acquiring body is dismissed. (ii) Cross Objection No. 288/2026 in FA No. 740/2012 and First Appeal No. 1258/2005 preferred by the claimants are partly allowed. (iii) The market value of the acquired lands is enhanced and determined at Rs.2,60,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Sixty Thousand only) per Hectare. (iv) The claimants shall be entitled to all consequential statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. FA 1258/05 & anr. 3 (v) The claimants shall also be entitled to interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, strictly in accordance with the Full Bench judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari 2016 (3) Mh.L. J. 457. (vi) The claimants shall not be entitled to interest for the delayed period, if any, in accordance with the orders passed in the respective matters. (vii) Save and except the above modification in the quantum of compensation, the impugned Judgments and Awards passed by the learned Reference Court shall remain unaltered. (viii) The Bank Guarantees, if any, furnished by the respective claimants stand discharged. (ix) The claimants shall pay deficit court fees, if any. (x) The claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by the appellant-acquiring body, together with accrued interest, if any, upon furnishing the usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. (xi) Modified award be drawn accordingly. (xii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/