BHAGWAN DEORAO HAMBARDE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
FA/1263/2017 · 2026-09-28
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13925 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13925 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
22-FA-1263-2017.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 22 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1263 OF 2017 Bhagwan Deorao Hambarde VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others …… Mr. S.K. Kadam, Advocate for Appellant Mr. B.A. Shinde, AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 Mr. S.S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3 …… 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 25.02.2014 passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, in Land Acquisition Reference No.84 of 2005 (Old L.A.R. No.212 of 1997). 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a copy of the order dated 29.07.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.1264 of 2017, wherein this Court has relied upon the order dated 20.11.2013 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.67 of 1997 and connected matters. He submits that, as the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid orders, the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof. The learned A.G.P., as well as the learned counsel appearing for the acquiring body, fairly concede the aforesaid position. 2026:BHC-AUG:44562
22-FA-1263-2017.odt 2
4. 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 this Court as well as by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the aforementioned matters, I see no reason to take a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgments and orders. Hence, the following order:
O R D E R (i) The impugned judgment passed by the Reference Court is modified. (ii) It is held that the claimants are entitled for compensation for their acquired lands at the rate of Rs.1,75,000/- per hector along with interest at the rate of 90% per annum from 07.05.1990 to 06.05.1991 and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum from 07.05.1991 till payment of entire amount. The claimants are entitled to solatium at the rate of 30% on the awarded amount.
(iii) The respondents shall pay the amount as directed above to the claimants/appellants along with statutory benefits. (iv) The first appeal is accordingly partly allowed. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE S P Rane