1 fa 113.2015 and IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR (1) FIRST APPEAL NO.113/2015 The Executive Engineer, Chandrapur Medium Project Division – 1 (VIDC), Chandrapur Appellant VERSUS 1. Shri. Ramrao Sudamji Tajne (Dead) Through LRs 1a) Prakash Ramrao Tajne Aged about: Major, Son 1b) Pradip Ramrao Tajne, Aged about: Major, Son 1c) Vijay Ramrao Tajne, Aged about: Major, Son 1d) Smt. Rekha alia Vanita Vijay Zade, Aged about: Major, Daughter 1e) Smt. Sitabai Ramrao Tajne Aged about: Major, Widow All R/o. PAWANI, Post Wahdnakh, Taq. Warora, Dist. Chandrapur. 2. State of Maharashtra, Through District Collector, Chandrapur Respondents (2) FIRST APPEAL NO.114/2015 The Executive Engineer, Chandrapur Medium Project Division - 1 (VIDC), Chandrapur Appellant VERSUS 1. Shri. Pradeep S/O Ramrao Tajne Aged about:- Major, Occ. Cultivator R/o. PAWANI, Taq. Warora, Dist. Chandrapur. 2026:BHC-NAG:3085 2 fa 113.2015 and 2. State of Maharashtra, Through District Collector, Chandrapur Respondents (3) FIRST APPEAL NO.115/2015 The Executive Engineer, Chandrapur Medium Project Division -1 (VIDC), Chandrapur Appellant VERSUS 1. Vijay Ramrao Tajne Aged about: Major, Occ.: Farmer, R/o. Pawni, Tq. Warora, Dist. Chandrapur 2. State of Maharashtra, Through District Collector, Chandrapur. Respondents (4) FIRST APPEAL NO.116/2015 The Executive Engineer, Chandrapur Medium Project Division-1 (VIDC), Chandrapur VERSUS 1. Sitabai W/o Ramrao Tajne Aged about:- Major, Occ. Cultivat R/o. PAWANI, Taq. Warora, Dist. 2. State of Maharashtra, Through District Collector, Chandrapur. Respondents .... Mr.Tariq Mohammad Zaheer, Advocate for Appellant in all Appeals. Mr. Anjan De, Advocate for Respondent no.1 in all Appeals. Mr. B.N.Lonare, AGP and Mr. U.R.Phasate, AGP for Respondent/State in all Appeals. CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. DATED : 20.02.2026 COMMON JUDGMENT 1. Since these Appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, “LAC”) are preferred by the Acquiring 3 fa 113.2015 and Body against the common Judgment and Award dated 31st October, 2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Warora, in Reference Case Nos.668/2008, 659/2008, 669/2008 and 649/2008 with other connected References and common submissions are made and common ground is involved, these appeals are decided by this common judgment. 2. The land of the Claimants in Reference No.668/2008 admeasuring 2.04 HR, Survey No.183/1 situated at village Pawani, the Land of Claimant in Reference No.659/2008 admeasuring 0.86 HR, Survey No.183/3 situated at village Pawani, the land of Claimant in Reference No.669/2008, Survey No.183/4 admeausring 1.37 HR situated at Village Pawani and land of Claimant in Reference No.649/2008, Survey No.183/2 admeasuring 0.44 HR respectively, came to be acquired for submergence in the `Dindora Baranj Irrigation Project’. Being not satisfied with the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO), the Claimants preferred the above referred Reference Applications, which came to be partly allowed. The rate of Rs. One Lakh Fifty Thousand (Rs.1,50,000) per hectare, Rs.One lakh Fifty thousand (Rs.1,50,000) per hectare, Rs. One lakh (Rs.1,00,000) per hectare and Rs.One lakh (Rs.1,00,000) per hectare was enhanced by the learned Reference Court for the lands of the Claimants in Reference Nos.668/2008, 4 fa 113.2015 and 659/2008, 669/2008 and 649/2008. The learned Reference Court also enhanced the compensation towards the Forest Trees standing on the acquired lands. Being aggrieved by the rate enhanced by the learned Reference Court for Forest Trees standing on the acquired lands, these Appeals are preferred by the Acquiring Body. 3. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Appellants – Acquiring Body that, the Appeals are restricted towards the enhancement of the compensation for the Forest Trees. He submits that, the said enhancement in compensation for the Forest Trees is based on the evidence of the Valuer examined by the Claimants before the learned Reference Court. He submits that, the enhancement is exorbitant and, therefore, the rates determined by the L.A.O. for the Forest Trees be confirmed. 4. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Claimants that, the Witness examined by the Claimants before the learned Reference Court for valuation of the Forest Trees was the Forest Officer. He submits that, there is nothing on record to disbelieve the evidence of the said Forest Officer, who acted on the directions of the SLAO and prepared his Valuation Report on the basis of the Government rates. He submits that, there is no merit in the Appeals and the same be dismissed. 5 fa 113.2015 and 5. Heard both the sides. With the assistance of the learned Advocates for the parties, perused the papers. 6. The only challenge in these Appeals is to the enhancement for the Forest Trees. The Claimants examined the witness by name Shridhar Rajaram Sonawane for compensation towards the Trees. His evidence go to show that, he was working in the Forest Department. He was attached to the Warora Forest Office as the Forester from 1998 till 2001. The LAO himself referred the matter of village Pawani, where the acquired lands were situated, for valuation of the Trees standing thereon. Accordingly, he personally visited the lands, verified the standing Trees and accordingly prepared the Valuation Report. His evidence go to show that the Valuation Report prepared by him was verified by the Round Forest Officer and was submitted to the LAO through the Divisional Office. The copy of the said Report is brought on record at Exhibit- 42. His evidence goes to show that, the Forest Department has the rate-list for the Forest Trees and on the basis of same, he valued the Trees in his Report. Nothing has come in the cross-examination so as to discard his testimony. The evidence of this witness clearly go to show that, he valued the Trees at the instance of the LAO and prepared the Report as per the Government Rates and submitted the same to the SLAO. The learned Reference Court accepted the said 6 fa 113.2015 and Report. No fault can be found with the observations and decisions of the learned Reference Court in accepting the said Report and accordingly enhancing the compensation for the Forest trees. 7. In view of the above, I see no merit in the Appeals. Hence, the following order:- ORDER (i) The Appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (ii) Record and Proceedings be sent back to the learned Trial Court. (iii) The amount deposited by the Acquiring Body in this Court, is permitted to be withdrawn by the Claimants along with interest accrued thereon, after following the prescribed procedure. (NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.) mukund ambulkar