CA 8357/07 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 901 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8357 OF 2007 IN FAST/13680/2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8358 OF 2007 IN FAST/13680/2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8359 OF 2007 IN FAST/13680/2007 GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LATUR AND ANR VERSUS VITTHAL MAROTI KAMBLE AND ORS ... Advocate for Applicant/appellant : Mr. S.G. Sangle AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Dande ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : July 07, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. In civil application for delay condonation, for the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. Delay of 366 days caused in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the present appeal can be disposed of in view of the order dated 3.12.2013 passed by this Court in First Appeal No. 1978/2023 (G.M.I.D.C. Latur and Anr. Vs. Kantrao Kisanrao Kulkarni & Ors.) and other connected matters. The said order reads thus :- “. These appeals are filed against the award passed by the Reference Court U/Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Reference Court partly allowed the references. Mr. Sangle, the learned counsel for appellants states that, the Court has relied on two decrees passed by the Civil Court while computing the market rate. The decrees of the Civil Court could not have been relied upon. According to the learned counsel though sale deeds were post notification, 2026:BHC-AUG:27075 CA 8357/07 2 same also could not have been considered. The sale instance in respect of Bagayat land is relied and on the basis of said sale instance the compensation could not have been awarded. 2. Mr. Tungar, the learned counsel for respondents/claimants supports the judgment. 3. It appears that, suit for specific performance was decreed in respect of land of the adjacent village in the year 1983 i. e. prior to three years of the notification U/Sec. 4 of the L. A. Act. The Court has considered the same. It is in respect of adjoining land. Moreover, the lands acquired are small pieces of land. The enhanced compensation is from Rs. 6,000/ to 25,000/ and only in two matters the compensation is about Rs. 32,000/. 4. The Reference Court has not considered the post notification sale deeds and has discarded the same as is evident from the judgment. The Court has considered sale instance which is available before the Court and which is in the form of decree and considering the same awarded compensation amount. Even the enhancement is not much. The Reference Court has granted just compensation. As such, the first appeals are dismissed, however, with no order as to costs” Therefore, he prays for similar order. The learned AGP fairly concedes this position. 2. In view of the above, the present appeal is also dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. Pending civil applications, if any, are also disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/