Dilwale 1 28-fa-632-10.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 28 FIRST APPEAL NO. 632 OF 2010 Sayed Ahmed Sayed Qasim VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ... Advocate for Appellant : Adv. N. D. Kendre h/f Mr. Santosh C. Bhosle AGP for Respondent-State: Mr. A. D. Wange ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 01.09.2026 PER COURT : 1. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 2000, the appeal is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. By this appeal, the appellant-original claimant takes an exception to the judgment and award dated 30.10.2009 passed by Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.12 of 2007, whereby the learned Reference Court refused to enhance the compensation to the extent claimed by claimant. 3. The land of the claimant adm. 42R from Gut No.399 was acquired for the purpose of Bhokar Turn-Road Main State Highway No.2 from Bhokar, Tahsil Bhokar Dist. Nanded. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) was published on 08.06.2000. Possession of the acquired land was taken in the year 2000. 2026:BHC-AUG:40943 Dilwale 2 28-fa-632-10.odt The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award under Section 11 of the Act on 29.04.2006 and determined the compensation at the rate of Rs.34,400/- per acre i.e. Rs.86,000/- per H. The claimant accepted the amount of compensation under protest and thereafter sought a reference to the Collector for determination of the market value of the acquired land. The claimant claimed compensation @ Rs.4,00,000/- per acre. The learned Reference Court enhanced the same to Rs.1,25,000/- per H. 4. Mr. Kendre holding for Mr. Bhosle, learned counsel for the claimant submits that the claimant produced several sale instances at Exhibits 15 to 20 from Taluka Bhokar, the details of which are as follows: Sr No. Exhibit No. Date Area Consideration Market Value in per sq. ft. 1 15 21.12.1994 1800 sq. ft. Rs.35,000/- Rs.19.44/- 2 16 05.02.1997 1380 sq. ft. Rs.17,000/- Rs.12.31/- 3 17 05.02.1997 1500 sq. ft. Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.66.66/- 4 18 13.12.1999 1200 sq. ft. Rs.50,000/- Rs.41.66/- 5 19 01.06.2006 75X1 sq. ft. Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.1333.33/- 6 20 30.03.2007 432 sq. ft. Rs.4,75,000/- Rs.1099.53/- The learned counsel submits that learned Reference Court ought to have treated these sale instances as comparable sale instances, but the learned Reference Court erroneously relied upon award passed in LAR No.62/1997 decided on 17.04.2006, wherein compensation @ Rs.5/- per sq. ft. was granted i.e. Rs.2,17,800/- per acre. 5. He further submits that the learned Reference Court has Dilwale 3 28-fa-632-10.odt determined the market value substantially on the basis of land revenue assessment and to that extent the approach adopted by learned Reference Court cannot be sustained, and therefore, he prays to allow the appeal filed by claimant by setting aside the impugned award. 6. Per contra, Mr. Wange, learned AGP for the State submits that the acquired land was agricultural land whereas the sale instances relied upon by the claimant were pertaining to non agricultural plots from developed Taluka Bhokar. Thus, the same cannot be directly relied upon for determination of market value of acquired agricultural land. Thus, he submits that the compensation awarded by SLAO is appropriate and prays to dismiss the appeal filed by claimant. 7. Having heard rival submissions of learned counsel and with their assistance upon perusal of record and proceedings, it appears that the SLAO has considered about 50 sale instances while passing the award under Section 11, which is exhibited before the learned Reference Court at Exhibit 6. The bare perusal of SLAO award depicts that two sale instances at Sr. Nos.2 and 6 dated 12.01.1996 and 24.04.1996 were considered by SLAO which fetched market value of Rs.2,00,000/-. The said sale instances being from Taluka Bhokar and prior to Section 4 notification can be relied upon for determination of market value. Thus, I am inclined to treat the said sale instances as comparable sale instances. 8. By the sale instance at Sr. No.2, land adm. 40 R from Gut no.412 was sold for Rs.80,000/- on 12.01.1996, which fetched market value of Dilwale 4 28-fa-632-10.odt Rs.2,00,000/-. As the said sale instance is four years prior to publication of Section 4 notification, I am inclined to grant 10% escalation for three years, which works out to Rs.2,60,000/- per H. Hence, I pass following order. ORDER i) The First Appeal is partly allowed. ii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to compensation @ Rs.2,60,000/- per H and to that extent impugned award stands modified. iii) The appellant/claimant shall be entitled to interest under Sections 28 and 34 as per Full Bench judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J.457. iv) Rest of the award passed by the learned Reference Court stands confirmed. v) Modified Award be drawn accordingly. vi) Deficit Court fees be paid. vii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE