1 926-fa-580-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 580 OF 2023 The Executive Engineer Minor Irrigation Division Osmanabad And Others VERSUS Ravishankar Narayan Kore Died His Lrs Narayan Pandhariappa Kore ... Mr. G. B. Rajale, Advocate for Appellants Mr. R. V. Gunale h/f Mr. V. D. Gunale, Advocate for Respondent no.2 ….. CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATED : 16TH SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. :- . Considering the short controversy in the appeal, I have heard both the learned Advocates for respective sides for final disposal of the First Appeal at admission stage. 2. Feeling dissatisfied by the judgment and award dated 04.07.2013, passed by learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Osmanabad in Land Acquisition Reference No.701 of 2007, the Acquiring Body is before this Court. 3. Mr. G. B. Rajale, learned Advocate for the appellants would submit that the Special Land Acquisition Officer has granted rate of Rs.605/- per R to the dry land which has been 2026:BHC-AUG:42830 2 926-fa-580-2023 enhanced to Rs.3,300/- per R by the Reference Court. He further submits that undoubtedly claimants’ land is classified as dry land. He submits that the compensation granted by the Reference Court is about six times more than the rate that was granted by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. It is further contention of Mr. Rajale that the Trial Court has placed mistaken reliance on the sale instance produced by the claimant as well as upon the orders passed by the Reference Court in connected matters. Thus, Mr. Rajale, learned Advocate records his objection to the judgment and award impugned in the First Appeal. 4. Per contra, Mr. R. V. Gunale h/f Mr. V. D. Gunale, learned Advocate for the claimants would advocate the findings rendered by the Trial Court. 5. With the able assistance of learned Advocates for both the sides, I have perused the case papers. The Trial Court has recorded its exhaustive findings at paragraph nos.17 to 19 of its judgment. The Reference Court placed reliance on the earlier order passed in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.450 of 2008, 557 of 2010 and 723 of 2010. It was observed that the lands which were the subject matter of the earlier Land 3 926-fa-580-2023 Acquisition References were situated in the village adjoining the village from which the subject matter land was acquired. The Trial Court placed reliance on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Jogindarsingh 2004(5) ALL MR (SC) 939 and also upon the cited Land Acquisition Reference for fixing the appropriate compensation. 6. Going through the reasoned judgment passed by learned Judge of the Reference Court, I find that there is hardly any reason to interfere in the impugned judgment and award. The view taken by the learned Judge of the Reference Court is a possible view. Considering that this is a piece of beneficial legislation, I do not find any merit in the objection raised by the Acquiring Body in the First Appeal. Hence, following order: ORDER a. First Appeal stands dismissed. b. The interest part shall be governed by the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016(4) All MR 513. 4 926-fa-580-2023 c. The claimants/respondents are permitted to withdraw the balance amount to which they are entitled after fiving effect to the judgment of Kailash Shiva Rangari supra insofar as it relates to interest. d. Any security already given/offered by the claimants stands discharged. e. The Acquiring Body/Appellant is permitted to withdraw any amount which is found excess. f. Civil Application if any, stands disposed of. ( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ) Rushikesh/2026