Judgment FA-706-2024 J..odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.706 OF 2024 APPELLANTS (Ori. Applicants on RA) 1. Sanjay Onkar Bonde, aged 50 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o Pimpalkhuta, Tq. Babhulgaon, Dist. Yavatmal. 2. Gajanan Onkar Bonde (Dead) by LRs. i) Akash Gajanan Bonde, aged 25 years, Occ. Agriculturist, ii) Akshay Gajanan Bonde, aged 27 years, Occ. Agriculturist, iii) Ku. Sapna D/o Gajanan Bonde, after marriage Mahalle, aged 28 years, Occ. Household iv) Vijaya Wd/o Gajanan Bonde, aged 50 years, Occ. Household, All R/o Ghuikhed, Tq. Chandur Railway, Dist. Amravati. 3. Nandkishor Onkar Bonde, aged 46 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o Pimpalkhuta, Tq. Babhulgaon, Dist. Yavatmal. ... VERSUS… RESPONDENTS (Original Respondents No.1 to 3 on RA) 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Collector Saheb, Yavatmal, Collector Office, Yavatmal 2. Collector Saheb, Yavatmal, Collector Office, Yavatmal Pvf 2026:BHC-NAG:10955 Judgment FA-706-2024 J..odt 2 3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bembla Project, Yavatmal, Collector Office, Yavatmal, New Administrative Building, Yavatmal. 4. The Executive Engineer, Bembla River Project, Yavatmal, (Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal) Awadhootwadi, At Post Taluka, Dist. Yavatmal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.B. Nakshane, Advocate for Appellants. Ms. D.V. Sapkal, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3/State. Mr. S.K. Bhoyar, Advocate for Respondent No.4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL , J . DATE : 20/08/2026 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. With the consent of learned counsels for the respective parties, this matter is taken up for final disposal. 2. At the outset, it is stated that the controversy in the present appeal is covered by the judgment delivered by this Court in First Appeal No.707 of 2024. 3. It is pointed out that the learned Reference Court by a common judgment dated 12.07.2011, decided the Land Acquisition Case No.332 of 2007 and Land Acquisition Case No.335 of 2007 and thereby, enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.180/- per Sq. Mtr. for the open plot and Rs.1,600/- per Sq. Mtr. for built-up area of the house. Pvf Judgment FA-706-2024 J..odt 3 4. The said judgment was independently challenged in two different first appeals before this Court. It is further pointed out that in First Appeal No.707 of 2024, the appellants therein were the owners of the Plot No.54 and the said proceedings were finally decided by this Court vide judgment dated 10.09.2024, whereby, it was held that the appellants therein were entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.800/- per Sq. Mtr. for the open plot area. 5. According to appellants, the issue regarding enhancement of compensation for the open plot has accordingly been considered and decided by this Court and the same can be made applicable in the present appeal. The appellants have stated that in respect of built-up area, they are waiving their claim and do not seek enhancement of the compensation for the built-up area. 6. In the light of above circumstances and considering the fact that this Court vide judgment dated 10.09.2024, has considered the entire issues involved in the matter and held that the appellants therein were entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.800/- per Sq. Mtr. for open plot area, in my opinion, the same can be made applicable in the present matter as well. Hence, I pass the following order :- Pvf Judgment FA-706-2024 J..odt 4 O R D E R (i) The First Appeal No.706 of 2024 is partly allowed. (ii) The appellants are held entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.800/- per Sq. Mtr. for the open plot area admeasuring 146.60 Sq. Mtrs. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order dated 12.07.2011, stands modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment passed by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Yavatmal in L.A.C. No.332 of 2007 is hereby confirmed. (iii) The respondent No.4 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount within a period of period of six months. 7. As there was a delay of 3130 days on the part of the appellants in approaching this Court, hence, for the said period the appellants would not be entitled for the interest on the enhanced compensation. 8. Accordingly, the first appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. (PRAVIN S. PATIL , J . ) 𝒫𝓇𝒾𝓋𝑒𝓁 Pvf