5-FA-2538-2019.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 903 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2538 OF 2019 Executive Engineer, Majbutikaran Division, Omerga VERSUS Waman Kashiba Gaikwad, through LRs. Shantabai And Others ….. Ms. Shelke Sunita Dasharat, Advocate for the Appellant – Acquiring Body Ms. Sakshi Ajeet Kale h/f Mr. Ajeet B. Kale, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 – Claimants Ms. Bharati Gunjal, AGP for Respondent Nos.5 and 6 ….. CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. DATE : 08.05.2026 PER COURT : 1. This is an Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the L.A Act’) by the Appellant – Acquiring Body against the Judgment and Award dated 03.08.2012, passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Reference Court’) in Land Acquisition Reference (LAR) No.226/2009. The operative order of the said Judgment reads as under : “1- The reference is partly allowed with proportionate costs. 2- The claimant is entitled to receive the enhance compensation of Rs.2,12,000/- against the house acquired by deducting the amount already received by the claimant. 3- The claimant is entitled for the solatium @ 30% on the enhanced compensation amount as per section 23(2) of the Act. 1 5-FA-2538-2019.odt 4- The claimant is also entitled for the additional benefit and interest as per provisions of section 23(1-A) of the Act. 5- The respondents shall pay the interest on the enhanced compensation amount @ 9% per annum from the date on which possession of the land is taken and @ 15% from the date of expiry of said period of one year on the amount of such excess which has not been paid in the Court before the date of such expiry, as per section 28 of the Act. 6- The respondents to deposit all the amounts within the period of 6 month from the date of this Judgment. 7- The award be prepared accordingly after confirming necessary court fees.” 2. Brief facts leading to the present Appeal are as under : [I] For the purposes of Turori Medium Project, Ashta, Taluka Omerga, District Osmanabad, the house property of the Respondents – Claimants bearing No.154, ad-measuring 71 sq. meters, situated at Village Ashta (Jahagir), came to be acquired. The notification under Sections 4 and 6 of the L.A. Act was published in the village on 13.03.1993 and 02.06.1994, respectively. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) determined the rate of the house property at Rs.773.73/- per sq. meter. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded for the house property, the Respondents preferred the above-referred reference application. The Respondents examined themselves and a private valuer in support of their claim for enhanced compensation. No evidence was led by the Appellant-Acquiring Body. On appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned Reference Court passed the impugned Judgment and Award. 2 5-FA-2538-2019.odt 3. Heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant – Acquiring Body and the learned Advocate for the Respondents. With their assistance, perused the papers on record. (a) It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Appellant – Acquiring Body that, the learned Reference Court took into consideration the report of the private valuer and granted enhancement in compensation. There was no material on record except the evidence of the private valuer in support of the enhanced compensation. She further submitted that, the learned Reference Court awarded interest from the date of possession, which is contrary to the settled legal position that, the interest should be granted from the date of award under Section 11 of the L.A. Act. (b) It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Respondents that, expert valuer was examined by the Respondents in support of the reference application. The detailed valuation report was submitted by the valuer after deducting 22.36% of the amount. She further submitted that, the enhancement by the learned Reference Court was merely 3.86 times. The compensation enhanced is 78% of the valuation drawn by the valuer. She submitted that, no interference was called for in the enhancement granted by the learned Reference Court. She fairly submitted that, in view of the settled legal position, the interest should run from the date of Award and not from the date of possession. 4. There is no dispute in respect of the purpose for which the house property of the Respondents was acquired. There is also no dispute in respect of the area of the house property acquired for the 3 5-FA-2538-2019.odt aforesaid purpose. The Claimants relied on the evidence of the valuer, who was examined below Exhibit – 51. His evidence shows that, he possessed a degree in engineer (Civil) and served as the Civil Engineer in the Military Engineering Services and was the Consulting Engineer for certain bodies. His evidence shows that, he visited the acquired house property one year after the acquisition. His evidence shows that, the rate applied for the valuation was based on the D.S.R. of the year – 1992 – 93 and he calculated the compensation of Rs.2,17,350/-. His evidence also shows that, no permission was taken from the Acquiring Body before valuation and no notes of valuation were submitted. The cross-examination shows that, certain aspects, such as the number of doors, depth of the wall, length and number of G.I sheets etc. were not mentioned in the report. 5. The learned Reference Court recorded that, no counter- evidence was brought on record against the evidence of the valuer. It is clear from the Judgment that, the valuer himself deducted 22.36% towards depreciation from the total valuation of Rs.2,12,000/-. This goes to show that, there was 22.36% deduction towards depreciation from the total amount of calculation calculated by the valuer. As no contra evidence was brought on record by the Acquiring Body so as to discard the valuation report, which was prepared after the site visit and there is 22.36% deduction towards depreciation from the final amount, which was determined by the valuer, in my view, the learned Reference Court has rightly determining the compensation towards the house property. The total amount of compensation which is awarded is not much. The learned Reference Court has passed well-reasoned 4 5-FA-2538-2019.odt Judgment. After considering the evidence on record and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the above discussion, no interference is called for in the enhanced compensation determined by the learned Reference Court. 6. The operative order of the impugned Judgment and Award shows that, the interest is granted from the date of possession of the house property. The same needs to be interfered with in view of the full Bench Decision in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari; 2016 SCC Online Bom 2236, which has ruled that the interest should be granted from the date of award under Section 11 of the L.A Act. Therefore, the impugned awards needs modification to that extent only. Hence, the following order : ORDER [I] The Appeal is partly allowed. [II] The Paragraph No.5 of the operative order of the impugned Award stands modified to the extent that, the interest shall be payable from the date of the Award under Section 11 of the L.A Act and not from the date of taking possession. [III] The rest of the Award is maintained. [IV] The amount deposited by the Acquiring Body is permitted to be withdrawn, after making calculations in view of the modification in the Award. [V] Record and Proceedings be sent to the learned Reference Court. [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] Sameer/May-2026 5