210.fa1184.1185.2009jud.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1184 OF 2009 Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Through its Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division No.2, Chikhali (Buldhana Irrigation Division), Dist. Buldhana ... Appellant Versus 1. Rajesh Radhakisan Jaju Aged about 47 years, Occ.: Agriculturist, R/o. Andhera, Tq. Deulgaon Raja, District – Buldana 2. State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Buldana ..Respondents FIRST APPEAL NO. 1185 OF 2009 Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Through its Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division No.2, Chikhali (Buldhana Irrigation Division), Dist. Buldhana ... Appellant Versus 1. Radhakisan Nathmal Jaju Aged about 70 years, Occ.: Agriculturist, R/o. Andhera, Tq. Deulgaon Raja, District – Buldana 2. State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Buldana ..Respondents Mr. J.B. Kasat, Advocate for appellant. Mr. T.D. Dhale, Advocate h/f Mr. N.B. Kalwaghe, Advocate for respondent No.1. Ms. M.R. Kavimandan, AGP for respondent No.2/State in both appeals. CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATE : 17.02.2025. PAGE 1 OF 5 2025:BHC-NAG:1784 210.fa1184.1185.2009jud.odt ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard finally with consent of the learned counsel for the parties. (2) First Appeal No.1184/2009 is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment and award dated 15.07.2009 passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Buldhana in Land Acquisition Case No.124/2007. (3) The land of the respondent No.1 bearing Gat No.1062, admeasuring 0.21 HR and Gat No.966, admeasuring 0.10 HR situated at village Andhera, Tah. Deulgaon Raja, District – Buldhana, were acquired for construction of Minor Irrigation Tank of Shivni-Armal. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, awarding compensation @ Rs.55,500/- per hectare for the acquired land. In addition to this, compensation was awarded for trees standing in the acquired land. The Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation for the 10 mango trees and 8 jamblum trees standing on the acquired land. (4) First Appeal No.1185/2009 is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment and award dated 15.07.2009 passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Buldhana in Land Acquisition PAGE 2 OF 5 210.fa1184.1185.2009jud.odt Case No.125/2007. The land of the respondent No.1 bearing Gat No.965, admeasuring 0.10 HR situated at Village Andhera, Tah. Deulgaon Raja, District – Buldhana, was acquired for the same project and compensation for the acquired land is granted at the same rate i.e. Rs.55,500/- per hectare by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Land Acquisition Officer has also granted compensation for 4 mango trees, 7 tamrind trees and 1 jamblum tree on the acquired land. (5) Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded the land owners, in both cases, who are respondent No.1 in the respective appeals made applications seeking reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation. The reference has been decided by the learned Civil Court vide judgment and award dated 15.07.2009 in both matters. In LAC No.124/2007, which is the subject matter of First Appeal No.1184/2009, the learned reference Court has granted additional compensation of Rs.13,123/- for the land and has also awarded compensation for 15 mango trees, 13 tamrind trees, 14 jamblum trees and 3 jajube trees. The compensation for the trees is awarded at the same rate which is fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. (6) Likewise, in LAC No.125/2007, the learned reference Court has awarded additional compensation of Rs.3,963/- for the land and has directed to pay compensation for 10 mango trees, 2 tamrind trees and 5 PAGE 3 OF 5 210.fa1184.1185.2009jud.odt jamblum trees at the rate determined by the Land Acquisition Officer. (7) Mr. Kasat, learned counsel for the appellant argues that the learned reference Court has erred in awarding additional compensation of land and compensation for trees. As against this, Mr. Tushar Dhale, learned counsel for respondent No.1 – land owners argues that the existence of trees cannot be disputed, as the same is reflected in the Notification under Section 4 and in the joint measurement report also existence of trees is clearly shown. He contends that the Land Acquisition Officer has erred in not awarding compensation for the trees which are admittedly standing on the acquired land. (8) Having heard the rival submissions, following point arises for my consideration : (i) Does the impugned judgment and award warrant any interference in appeal ? (9) As to point No.(i) - The enhancement in award is granted for justifiable reasons recorded in the judgment. The enhancement is very meagre and does not warrant any interference. (10) As regards the trees, I have perused the record with the able assistance of the learned counsel. The land measurement report indicates existence of trees. The number of trees is also clearly mentioned PAGE 4 OF 5 210.fa1184.1185.2009jud.odt in the said report. It is clear that the number of trees had skipped the attention of the Land Acquisition Officer while passing the award. It also needs to be mentioned that the compensation for the trees is awarded at the rate determined by the Land Acquisition Officer. The finding regarding the number of trees is just and proper and as such, the impugned judgment and award do not warrant any interference on this point as well. In the light of the aforesaid, the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. (11) Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. [ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.] Prity PAGE 5 OF 5