CA 16649/15 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 21 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16649 OF 2015 IN FAST/33952/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16653 OF 2015 IN FAST/33166/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16654 OF 2015 IN FAST/33166/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16650 OF 2015 IN FAST/33952/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16652 OF 2015 IN FAST/33166/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16651 OF 2015 IN FAST/33952/2015 GMIDC THR THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LATUR MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR AND ANOTHER VERSUS BAPURAO NAMDEO BEMBADE ... Advocate for Applicants : Mrs. Bharaswadkar Patil Kalpalata … CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : July 27, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. In civil applications filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeals, for the reasons stated therein, the applications are allowed. Delay is condoned. 2. Admit. 3. As the acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 1996, heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the appellant. None for the original claimants. 4. The present appeals are filed by the acquiring body, thereby challenging the judgment and award dated 29.7.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedpur in LAR No.59/2002 and 58/2002, whereby the learned reference court has enhanced the 2026:BHC-AUG:32076 CA 16649/15 2 compensation. 5. The lands of the claimants were acquired for Narwatwadi Storage Tank by issuing notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 28.3.1996. The possession of the lands were taken through private negotiations on 22.10.1994. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has declared the award and has granted meager compensation. Being aggrieved, the original claimants preferred above references. Before the reference court the claimants have relied upon the sale instance below Exh. 21 dated 30.4.1994 and considering the same, the reference court has determined the market value of the acquired land as Rs.1,40,000/- per H. for irrigated land Rs.70,000/- per H. for dry land. Hence, the present appeals are filed by the acquiring body. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the reference court has wrongly relied upon the sale instance below Exh. 21 and wrongly enhanced the compensation and prayed to allow the appeals. 7. After going through the judgment and order passed by the learned reference court, it appears that the lands of the claimants were acquired for above project. The claimants have relied upon sale instance Exh. 21 dated 30.4.1994, which was prior to section 4 notification, by which 7 R. land from Survey No. 193 from village Andhori was sold for Rs. 8000/-. The reference court has rightly relied upon the sale instance below Exh. 21 dated 30.4.1994 as comparable sale instance and has rightly determined the market value of the acquired land as Rs.1,40,000/- per H. for irrigated land and Rs.70,000/- per H. for dry land considering the source of water and crop pattern in the acquired lands. I see no error in the impugned award of the reference court. Both the appeals are devoid of merits and CA 16649/15 3 are hereby dismissed. 8. Pending civil applications, if any, also stands disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/