FA 477/2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 904 FIRST APPEAL NO. 477 OF 2009 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS VERSUS MURLIDHAR RAMA GORE AND ORS ... Advocate for Appellant : Mr. A.D. Wange ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : September 30, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 1989, with the consent of learned AGP taken up for final hearing. 2. By this appeal, the appellant/State assails the judgment and award dated 4.10.2004 passed by the learned VI Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed in LAR No. 291/1995, whereby the reference court has enhanced the compensation in favour of the claimants. 3. The land of the claimants from S.No. 255/9/2 to the extent of 0.03 R., S.No. 273/3 to the extent of 0.04 R., S. No. 273/12 to the extent of 0.26 R., S.No. 273/8 to the extent of 0.31 R. and S.No. 273/21 to the extent of 0.02 R. situated at village Nagtala, Tal. Ashti was acquired for the purpose of percolation tank at village Nagtala along with fruit bearing trees. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be published on 8.2.1990. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has declared the award and has granted compensation at the rate of Rs.72/- per R. for acquired land and Rs.2/- for Potkharab land which was very meager compensation. The claimants received the compensation under protest and sought reference under section 18 of the Act and contended that in the 2026:BHC-AUG:46227 FA 477/2009 2 acquired land there were fruit bearing trees. 4. The claimants relied upon the sale instance dated 11.5.1989 by which 25 R. land was sold for Rs. 25000/-. By the another sale instance, 81 R. land was sold for Rs.32000/-. The learned reference court after considering the sale instances determined the compensation at the rate of RS.500/- per R. for acquired lands and Rs.250/- per R. for Potkharab lands. After going through the judgment and award passed by the reference court, this court is of the view that the reference court has granted just and reasonable compensation and no exorbitant or excessive compensation is granted by the reference court. The learned reference court has not granted compensation for fruit bearing trees. In view of the above, no case is made out for interference. The appeal is dismissed. Pending civil application, if any, also stands disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/