( 1 ) ca11782.12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 931 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11782 OF 2012 IN FAST/22971/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS GOLAPA SAKHARAM BONTE CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11775 OF 2012 IN FAST/22952/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS KISAN BAPU BONTE DIED THR. LRS. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11771 OF 2012 IN FAST/22967/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS KISAN BALA GHOLAP CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11780 OF 2012 IN FAST/22956/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS DHONDIBA KRISHNA BONTE CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11785 OF 2012 IN FAST/22964/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS APPA VITHAL GHOLAP CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11773 OF 2012 IN FAST/22960/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS DAGDU THAKA GHOLAP DIED THR LRS. 2025:BHC-AUG:25870 ( 2 ) ca11782.12 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11767 OF 2012 IN FAST/22914/2012 THE STATE OF MAH VERSUS SAKHARAM RANBA GLOLAP Mr. R.B. Dhaware, AGP for the applicant-appellant/State. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 12.09.2025 PC :- CIVIL APPLICATIONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY 01. These Civil Applications are filed for condonation of delay caused in preferring the First Appeals. The delay is of 211 days. 02. For the reasons stated in the applications, the delay is condoned. The Civil Applications are allowed. The First Appeals be registered. FIRST APPEALS 01. Heard. Since all these First Appeals are arising out of a common judgment and award dated 24.08.2011 passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar, in LAR No. 421 to 426 and 535 of 1991, they are being decided together. ( 3 ) ca11782.12 02. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be issued on 20.01.1987 for acquisition of land of the respondents – claimants for the purpose of percolation tank in village Nandur Pathar, Tal. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar. The details of the proceedings, land acquired, the compensation awarded by the learned Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) and by the learned Reference Court are given as per the chart below :- Sr. No. FA with CA No. LAR No. Gat No. and Land Acquired SLAO Rate (Rs.) Ref.Court Rate (Rs.) 1 CA No.11767/12 in FAST No. 22914/12 421/91 895 & 925 0.25 R & 0.07 R 2250/- 630/- Total Amt. 13120/- 2 CA No.11785/12 in FAST No. 22964/12 425/91 0.83 0.32 0.02 2704/- Total Amt. 12796/- 3 CA No.11774/12 in FAST No. 22960/12 424/91 0.32 0.19 4500/- 1400/- 2880/- Total Amt. 23220/- 4 CA No.11776/12 in FAST No. 22952/12 422/91 0.18 0.14 0.32 11250/- 3060/- Total Amt. 44190/- 5 CA No.11781/12 in FAST No. 22956/12 423/91 0.32 2880/- 11565/- Total Amt. 61055/- 6 CA No.11771/12 in FAST No. 22967/12 426/91 0.09 0.08 508/- 800/- Total Amt. 6192/- 7 CA No.11782/12 in FAST No. 22971/12 535/91 0.12 1080/- Total Amt. 4920/- 03. The learned SLAO awarded compensation as per his calculations and rate determined by him. The award came to be passed on 01.04.1989. The claimants being dissatisfied by adequacy of the ( 4 ) ca11782.12 compensation, preferred references under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the learned Collector. The references came to be forwarded to the learned Reference Court. The learned SLAO granted compensation @ Rs. 9,000/- per hectare for jirayat land Group No. I, @ Rs.10,000/- per hectare for jirayat land Group No. II and @ Rs. 11,000/- per hectare for jirayat land Group No. III. For irrigated land he granted @ Rs. 13,500/- per hectare for Group No.I and @ Rs. 15,000/- per hectare for irrigated land Group No. II. Thus the total compensation was Rs. 1,67,086/- along with statutory benefits. 04. In the Reference Court, the claimants led evidence. All the lands were held to be jirayat. No compensation was awarded towards trees. All the references came to be decided together. The claimants in support of their claims, relied upon sale deed at Sr. No. 31, wherein consideration was Rs. 12,195/- in the year 1986. Considering the consideration the rate was Rs. 18,100/- per hectare. Another sale-deed dated 06.03.1984 for 16 R land was relied upon. The consideration was shown to be Rs. 10,000/-. It shows the rate of the land per hectare was Rs. 70,000/- in 1984. The claimants produced only sale instances. The learned Reference Court, therefore, accepted the said instances. Mainly considering the same, the Reference Court came to a conclusion and ( 5 ) ca11782.12 taken rate to be Rs.50,000/- per hectare for jirayat land and considering that the compensation was awarded. 05. The learned AGP for the appellant vehemently argued that the learned Reference Court has not properly considered the evidence. The enhancement is awarded at exorbitant rate. The impugned judgment and award thus deserves to be set aside. 06. This Court has gone through the judgment and award. The Reference Court has taken the sale-instances to arrive at the figure of fair compensation. Said sale transaction is of the year 1984. The learned Reference Court, therefore, rightly considered the increase in the land value as 10% per year and considering all these aspects and other relevant aspects, has awarded the compensation. This Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and award. The First Appeals are, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. 07. Pending Civil Application, if any, also stands disposed off. [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] snk/2025/Sep25/ca11782.12