1 918-CA 6391-2012.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6391 OF 2012 IN FAST/11494/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Shewantabai Bhikaji Rode And Ors. .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6392 OF 2012 IN FAST/11494/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Shewantabai Bhikaji Rode And Ors. .. Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 11494 OF 2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Shewantabai Bhikaji Rode And Ors. .. Respondents AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6393 OF 2012 IN FAST/11498/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Kundlik Parvati Rode And Anr. .. Respondents 1 of 6 2025:BHC-AUG:24266 2 918-CA 6391-2012.odt WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6394 OF 2012 IN FAST/11498/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Kundlik Parvati Rode And Anr. .. Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 11498 OF 2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Kundlik Parvati Rode And Anr. .. Respondents AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6398 OF 2012 IN FAST/11502/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Manisha Bapu Rode And Anr. .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6399 OF 2012 IN FAST/11502/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Manisha Bapu Rode And Anr. .. Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 11502 OF 2012 2 of 6 3 918-CA 6391-2012.odt The State Of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Manisha Bapu Rode And Anr. .. Respondents AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6396 OF 2012 IN FAST/11505/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Shripati Parvati Rode And Ors. .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6397 OF 2012 IN FAST/11505/2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Shripati Parvati Rode And Ors. .. Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 11505 OF 2012 The State Of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Shripati Parvati Rode And Ors. .. Respondents Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for the Applicants/Appellants. Mr. Mahesh R. Sonawane, Advocate for Respondents/claimants CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2025. 3 of 6 4 918-CA 6391-2012.odt PER COURT :- CIVIL APPLICATIONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY : 1. In Civil Application No. 6391/2012, the learned advocate Mr. Sonawane appears for respondent Nos. 2 to 4. The respondent No. 4 is the only legal heir of deceased respondent No. 1. He submits that, there are no heirs of respondent No. 1 and therefore, he need not to bring on record legal heirs. 2. In the civil applications, there is delay of 968 days caused in filing the first appeals. For the reasons recorded in the applications, delay stands condoned. The civil applications are allowed. Office to register first appeals. FIRST APPEALS : 1. All these appeals are arising out of judgment and award dated 07.01.2008 passed by the learned C.J.S.D., Shrigonda in respective L.A.Rs. as per the chart below : Sr. No F.A. with C.A. No. LAR No. Land Acquired SLAO Rate Reference Court Rate 1 CA 6391/12 IN FAST 11494/2012 707/2003 1 H 80 R Rs. 79,145/- Rs. 17,6095/- 2 CA 6369/12 IN FAST 11505/2012 704/2003 357.5 R Rs. 37,088/- Rs. 70,900/- 4 of 6 5 918-CA 6391-2012.odt 3 CA 6398/12 IN FAST 11502/2012 705/2003 30 R Rs. 13,190/- Rs. 42,540/- 4 CA 6393/12 IN FAST 11498/2012 706/2003 357.5 R Rs. 37,087/- Rs. 70,899/- 2. Since the appeals are arising out of common judgment and award all are taken up together. The land of the claimants came to be acquired from village Suregaon, Taluka Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar for Jabhalpattil Pazar Tank. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be issued on 13.11.1997. Award came to be passed on 15.11.2000. In the award, learned S.L.A.O. granted compensation as given in the chart above. The learned Reference Court in references enhanced the amount which is less than double the amount in L.A.R. Nos. 707/2003, 704/2003 and 706/2003. Only in L.A.R. No. 705/2003 rate awarded is more than double, however, the same is still less than three times of the compensation awarded by the learned S.L.A.O. 2. The Government of Maharashtra vide Government Resolution dated 03.11.2016 and Corrigendum dated 23.02.2017, took a decision not to file appeals where the amount enhanced is 5 of 6 6 918-CA 6391-2012.odt less than four times of the amount awarded by the learned S.L.A.O. In case, appeals are filed, the said appeals be withdrawn. In the present appeals, the compensation awarded by the learned Reference Court is within four times. The learned AGP also could not point any illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and award. Considering this, this Court finds that, no purpose would be served by keeping the appeals pending. 3. Therefore, the first appeals stand dismissed. No order as to costs. 4. Pending civil applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. ) P.S.B. 6 of 6