C-FA1288-20 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 1288 OF 2020 1. Vishwas s/o Krishna Gadkar Age 45 years, Occu: Agri. R/o Tugaon, Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad ... Appellants VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Osmanabad 2. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Osmanabad. ... Respondents Mr. Sanjaykumar B. Bhosale, Advocate for Appellants Mrs. V. M. Chate, AGP for Respondent No.1 State Mr. S. C. Arora, Advocate for Respondent No.2 CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. Dated : 27th July, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. This is the First Appeal by the original Claimant for enhanced compensation towards acquisition of his land admeasuring 1 H 0 R from Gat No. 74-B at village Tugaon, Taluka and District Osmanabad for submergence on account of increase in the height of the Terna Medium Project. 2. The Section 4 Notification under the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Government Gazette on 11.03.1993 and the Award came to be declared on 27.03.1997. The Special Land Acquisition 1 of 5 2026:BHC-AUG:31301 C-FA1288-20 Officer ( the S.L.A.O. for short) determined the compensation at the rate of Rs.407/- per R for the acquired land. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the S.L.A.O., the Appellant preferred Land Acquisition Reference No. 109/2002 and led his evidence. No evidence was led by the Acquiring Body and the State. By the Judgment and Award dated 30.11.2012, the learned Reference Court partly allowed the Reference Application and determined the rate of Rs.42,000/- per Acre for the acquired dry land. 3. Heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant, the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body and the learned AGP for the State, finally. With their assistance, perused the papers on record. 4. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Appellant that, the learned Reference Court, in connected Reference Application No. 690/2010, arising out of the same acquisition proceedings, determined the rate of Rs.2,500/- per R for the irrigated land. Since the Appellant's land came to be acquired for the very same project, for which the land of the said claimant is acquired, the Appellant is entitled for the same rate on the ground of parity. Copy of the Judgment and Award dated 19.07.2013, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in L.A.R. No. 690/2010 is tendered across the Bar by the learned Advocate for the Appellant. The same is marked as Exhibit-1. 5. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body 2 of 5 C-FA1288-20 that, the Appellant will have to establish that his acquired land was similar to the land which was the subject matter of the said Reference Application and only then, the ground of parity would be available to him. He further submits that, the Appellant is not entitled to interest for the delayed period, since the Appeal was filed in the year 2015 and was firstly circulated in the year 2020. He further submits that, the learned Reference Court awarded interest from the date of Section 4 Notification, which needs to be corrected in view the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J.457. 6. It is submitted by the learned AGP that, he supports the contentions made by the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body. 7. There is no dispute in respect of the extent of the land acquired and the purpose for which it is acquired. The observation in the judgment by the learned Reference Court shows that, the Appellant's land was dry land. Perusal of the copy of the Award dated 19.07.2013 in L.A.R. No.690/2010 goes to show that, the land from the same village i.e. Tugaon was acquired for the very same project i.e. Terna Medium Project. The said decision appears to be based on the earlier decision dated 16.07.2013, passed by the learned Reference Court in L.A.R. No. 99/2010, and the learned Reference Court affirmed the rate of Rs.2,500/- per R for the irrigated land in the said Reference 3 of 5 C-FA1288-20 Application No.690/2010. Considering that, the acquired land of the Appellant and the land which was the subject matter of Reference Application No. 690/2010 are from the same village and acquired for the very same project, the Appellant shall be entitled for the same rate on the ground of parity i.e. half of Rs.2,500/- being the dry land. 8. The order dated 07.02.2020 passed by this Court, in the Application for Condonation of delay in this Appeal, goes to show that, while condoning the delay, this Court observed that, the Appellant shall not be entitled for the interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period. This shows that, the above referred contention of the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body is addressed. The operative order of the impugned Award goes to show that, the interest is directed to be calculated from the date of Section 4 Notification. Undisputedly, the same is contrary to the decision in Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra) and therefore, the interest will have to be calculated from the date of Award. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (1) The First Appeal is partly allowed. (2) The Award dated 30.11.2012 passed by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in L.A.R. No. 109/2002 stands modified as under:- 4 of 5 C-FA1288-20 (a) The Appellant/Claimant shall be entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.1,250/- (Rupees One thousand Two Hundred Fifty only) per R for the dry land. (b) The interest shall be calculated from the date of Award by the the Special Land Acquisition Officer i.e. 27.03.1997. (c) The Appellant/Claimant shall not be entitled for the interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period. (3) The Appellants shall pay the enhanced Court fees. (4) The pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (5) Record and Proceedings be sent back to the learned Reference Court. (NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.) JPChavan 5 of 5