902-FA-4164-2016.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 902 FIRST APPEAL NO. 4164 OF 2016 The Chief Officer Municipal Council, Tuljapur VERSUS Surekha Rajendra Sonji And Others WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 4168 OF 2016 The Chief Officer Municipal Council, Tuljapur VERSUS Anand Sahebrao Sonji And Others …… Mr. K.K. Kulkarni, Advocate for Appellant in both FAs Mr. A.M. Phule, AGP for Respondents No.4 and 5 in both FAs Mr. A.D. Aghav, Advocate for Respondent No.1 and 2 in FA/4164/2016 …… CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. This appeal arises out of the Judgments and Awards dated 29.07.2016 passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in L.A.R. Nos.11 of 2013 and 12 of 2013. 3. Learned counsel Mr. Kulkarni for the appellant and the learned AGP for the State, upon going through the record, submit that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the order dated 04.09.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.237 of 2017, wherein this Court relied upon the order dated 21.08.2026 passed by this Court in 2026:BHC-AUG:43018 902-FA-4164-2016.odt 2 First Appeal No.2343 of 2015 and connected matters. By the said order, this Court partly allowed the appeal preferred by the claimant and enhanced the amount of compensation payable to the claimant therein, whereas the appeal preferred by the acquiring body, i.e. the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Tuljapur, was dismissed. They, therefore, submit that the present appeal may also be disposed of in terms of the said orders. 4. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant and the learned AGP, and in view of the admitted position that the controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to that decided by this Court in First Appeal No.237 of 2017 vide order dated 04.09.2026, relying upon the order dated 21.08.2026 passed in First Appeal No.2343 of 2015 and connected matters, I see no reason to take a different view. Consequently, the challenge raised by the appellant-acquiring body cannot be accepted. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be dismissed. 5. The First Appeals are dismissed. 6. Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE S P Rane