FA 3052/2008 & Anr. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 18 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3052 OF 2008 BAHUBALI DIGAMBAR DURUGKAR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA … WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 3055 OF 2008 CHANDRAKANT SUBRAO PATIL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ... Advocate for Appellants: Mr. J.R. Patil AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.M. Phule ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : September 22, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. FA No. 3055/2008 is not on board. Taken on board. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 3. The present appeals arises out of the judgment and award dated 23.7.2007 passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in LAR No. 212/1994 and 211/1994. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants has tendered across the Bar a copy of the judgment and order dated 10.01.2019 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.95/2004 (Jayant Kishanrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra) and other connected matters. Both the counsel for the respective parties submit that this Court has already decided the above matter arising out of the same notification, same project and determined the compensation at the rate of Rs.15/- per sq. ft. in FA No. 95/2004 (supra). It is, therefore, contended that the controversy involved 2026:BHC-AUG:43367 FA 3052/2008 & Anr. 2 in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment and order in FA No. 95/2004 (supra), and consequently, the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof. 5. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by the Coordinate Bench in FA No. 95/2004 (supra), I see no reason to take a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment and order. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) The appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The claimants/appellants are entitled to receive enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.15/- per sq. ft. for their acquired lands. (iii) The claimants shall be entitled to all consequential statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. (iv) The claimant shall be entitled to interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, strictly in accordance with the principles laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457. (v) Save and except the aforesaid modification, the judgments and award passed by the learned Reference Court stand confirmed. (vi) The claimant shall not be entitled to the interest for the period of delay, if any, condoned by this Court caused in filing the present appeal. (vii) The claimant shall pay the deficit Court-fees, if any. FA 3052/2008 & Anr. 3 (viii) The modified award be drawn accordingly. (ix) Pending Civil Application, if any, stands disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/