IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 41 FIRST APPEAL NO. 4047 OF 2017 YOURAJ BHIMRAO MANE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. S.N. Patne AGP for Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr. S.N. Morampalle ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : August 31, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Admit. 2. As the acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 2004, heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for respective parties. 3. The present appeal arises out of the Judgment and Award dated 17.06.2014 passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in LAR No. 516/2011. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a copy of the judgment and order dated 5.8.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No. 3351/2017 (The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division Majbutikaran Division, Omerga and Ors. Vs. Shivaji Santram Dudhal and Ors.) and connected matter. He submits that the land of the appellant was acquired from the same village i.e. Gondhalwadi, Dist.Osmanabad, for the same public purpose i.e. Kadamwadi Storage Tank, and under the very same notification as involved in the said appeal. It is, therefore, contended that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment and order in FA No. 3351/2017 (supra), and consequently, the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof. 2026:BHC-AUG:41157 5. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 fairly concedes the aforesaid position. 6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by this court in FA No. 3351/2017 (supra), I see no reason to take a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment and order. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) Claimant is entitled to receive the compensation at the rate of Rs.6000/- per R. for Bagayat land i.e. Rs.2,40,000/- per Acre. (iii) The claimant is entitled to receive the interest under sections 28 and 34 of the Act from the date of award in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari (supra). (iv) Modified award be drawn accordingly. (v) Rest of the award remains unaltered. (vi) Claimant to pay the deficit court fees, if any, on enhanced amount. (vii) Pending civil applications, if any, are also disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/