FA 929/08 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 907 FIRST APPEAL NO. 929 OF 2008 NILKANTH RAOJI KULKARNI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. C.R. Deshpande AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.M.Phule ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : September 22, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. As the acquisition proceedings is initiated in the year 1988, heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for respective parties. 2. By this appeal, the appellant/original claimant assails the judgment and award dated 27.3.2006 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Additional District Judge, Nilanga, Dist. Latur in LAR No. 365/1998, by which the learned reference court has enhanced the compensation, but not granted as claimed by the claimants. 3. The land of the claimant was acquired for submergence of K.T. Wear, Killari, Tq. Ausa District Latur by issuing notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 27.10.1988. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has declared the award on 12.11.1991 and has granted compensation to the acquired lands by classifying the acquired lands into four groups and fixed the value of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per H. for lands falling under group II, at the rate of Rs.17,000/- and 19,000/- per H. for the lands falling under group III and IV, respectively. After receipt of the compensation under protest, the claimant 2026:BHC-AUG:43319 FA 929/08 2 filed reference under section 18 of the Act for proper determination of the market value of the acquired land. The reference court after considering the sale instances determined the compensation at the rate of Rs.93,750/- per H. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the reference court has committed error while determining the compensation for the acquired land of the claimant and has granted very inadequate compensation and therefore, the present appeal is filed. 5. The learned AGP supports the order passed by the reference court and submits that the reference court has rightly determined the compensation for acquired land and prays to dismiss the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, with their assistance I have gone through the record and proceedings, the impugned judgment and order of the reference court. On perusal of the same, it is seen that the reference court after relying on the sale instance of S.No.41/A which was dated 13.4.1983, determined the compensation by granting 10% increase per year as the sale instance was of the year 1983 and section 4 notification was published in the year 1988. Therefore, after going through the judgment and order passed by the reference court this Court finds that the reference court has granted proper and just compensation and there is no scope to grant further enhancement in favour of the appellant. Hence, the appeal is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/