29-FA-4046-2017.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 29 FIRST APPEAL NO. 4046 OF 2017 Mahadeo Manik Satpute VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another …… Mr. Santosh N. Patne, Advocate for Appellant Mr. S.N. Morampalle, AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 …… CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 28 SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The present appeal arises out of the Judgment and Award dated 17.06.2014 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in Land Acquisition Reference No.518 of 2011. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a copy of the order dated 31.08.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.4047 of 2017, wherein this Court determined the market value of the acquired bagayat land at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per R, i.e. Rs.2,40,000/- per acre. He submits that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid order. However, he fairly submits that the land acquired in the said matter was irrigated land, whereas the land acquired in the present matter is seasonally irrigated land. He, therefore, submits that the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof. 4. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 fairly concedes the aforesaid position. 2026:BHC-AUG:44557 29-FA-4046-2017.odt 2 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 covered by the decision of this Court in the aforementioned matter, I see no reason to take a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said order. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) The First Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) Claimant is entitled to receive the compensation at the rate of Rs.4,500/- per R. for seasonally irrigated land i.e. Rs.1,80,000/- per Acre. (iii) The claimant is entitled to receive the interest under sections 28 and 34 of the Act from the date of award in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3), 457. (iv) Modified award be drawn accordingly. (v) Rest of the award remains unaltered. (vi) Claimant to pay the deficit court fees, if any, on enhanced amount. (vii) Pending civil applications, if any, are also disposed of [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE S P Rane