1 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. 946 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1019 OF 2011 SAYYED IMRAL S/O IRSHAD HUSSAIN VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 433 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS SAYYED AKBAR SAYYED JAKIRSAB AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 435 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS SAYED MOHSIN ABDUL FAIZSAB AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 428 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS SAYYED IRSHAD HUSSAIN ANSARI AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 430 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS HABIBABI SAYYED JAKIRSAAB AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1017 OF 2011 MADHUKAR S/O SHRIRANG JADHAV AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER 2026:BHC-AUG:16137 2 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1014 OF 2011 SAYYED MOHASIN ABDUL FAIJSAB VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1015 OF 2011 HABIBABI W/O SAYYED JAKIRSAB AND OTHERS VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 432 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS MADHUKAR SHRIRANG JADHAV AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 436 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS SAYYED MAGDOOM RAJASAAB AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1016 OF 2011 SAYYED MAGDUM RAJASAB VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 427 OF 2015 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR VERSUS SAYYED IMRAL IRSHAD HUSSAIN AND OTHERS 3 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1018 OF 2011 SAYYED AKBAR SAYYED JAKIRSAB VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ... Mr. Laxmikant C. Patil, Advocate for Claimants. Ms. Anuradha S. Mantri, AGP for Respondent / State Mr. S. G. Sangle, Advocate for Respondent / Acquiring Body. ... CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 10th April, 2026. Per Court : 1 These appeals are preferred against the common judgment and award dated 11th October, 2010, passed by the learned Land Reference Court, Taluka Ahmedpur, District Latur, in LAR Nos.289, 290, 291, 292, 48, 49 and 50 of 2007. 2 The learned Advocate for the claimants pointed out the pleadings, the evidence, the grounds of objections in the appeals and the reasons and findings in the impugned judgment and award. 3 The learned Advocate for the claimants pointed out the judgment dated 16th March, 2026, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.1098 of 2018 and other connected matters, and submitted that the lands in those appeals were acquired for one 4 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt and the same purpose, in which this Court awarded compensation to the similarly situated claimants @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. He submitted that, therefore, the present claimants are entitled to the same rate of compensation. In the present appeals, the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the LA Act”) was issued and published on 1st January, 2004. In First Appeal No.1098 of 2018 and other connected matters, the notifications under Section 4 of the LA Act were issued and published on 3rd October, 2004, 7th July, 2006, 25th February, 2006, 7th July, 2006 and 3rd December, 2005 in Group Nos.I to V, respectively. Admittedly, the present appeals fall under the category of Group No.I. There is only some months’ difference of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the LA Act. He, therefore, prayed to award the same rate of compensation to the present claimants. 4 Mr. Sangle, learned counsel for the acquiring body conceded the said position of the decision in First Appeal No.1098 of 2018 (supra). 5 It is undisputed fact that the claimants’ lands in First Appeal No.1098 of 2018 and other connected matters, are acquired for one and the same purpose, in which this Court held that the claimants are entitled to compensation @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. for Group No.I 5 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt category. It is not disputed that the present claimants’ lands are also come in Group No.I category. There is only some months’ difference of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the LA Act. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to compensation @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. The first appeals filed by the claimants and the acquiring body deserve to be partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award deserves to be partly set aside. Hence, the following order:- O R D E R I. The first appeals filed by the claimants and the acquiring body are partly allowed. II. The impugned judgment and award is partly set aside and modified as under:- (a) The claimants are entitled to the compensation @ Rs.45/- per sq. ft. (b) Claimants be paid, in addition to aforesaid, an amount calculated at the rate of 12% p.a. for the period commencing from date of section 4 notification in respect of their acquired lands to the date of award by Collector as provided under section 23(1-A) of the LA Act. (c) Claimants would also be paid solatium pursuant to section 23(2) of the LA Act. 6 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt (d) Interest be paid on the compensation in accordance with full bench judgment viz; 2016(3) Mh.L.J. 457: MANU/MH/0557/2016, in the case of “State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari” from the date of award @ 9% p.a. for first year and @ 15% p.a. for subsequent years till payment of amount. (e) It is made clear that the claimants shall not be entitled to the amount of interest for the period of delay caused in filing the first appeals, which are condoned by this Court, on the said condition. (f) The award amount was deposited by the acquiring body either in the High Court or in the Trial Court and the claimants were permitted to withdraw the said amount. The claimants will be entitled to withdraw the remaining amount along with accrued interest. (g) Acquiring Body shall deposit the amount of compensation within six (6) months from the date of uploading of this order. (h) Bank Guarantee, if any, furnished by the Claimants stands revoked. (i) The claimants are required to pay the deficit court fees, if any, on the enhanced amount of 7 946 F.A.1019.2011 ORS.odt compensation. If the deficit court fee is not paid by the claimants, then the same shall be recovered/deducted from the enhanced compensation amount. (j) Pending civil applications, if any, are disposed of. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] nga