CA 6199/17 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 7 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6199 OF 2017 IN FAST/10361/2017 ASHRUBA CHANGDEO BHORE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr. R.D. Gaikwad h/f. Mr. S.G. Kawade AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. T.B. Bhosle ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : September 30, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. In civil application filed for condonation of delay, heard the learned counsel for the applicant/original claimant, the AGP for the State and the learned counsel for acquiring body. For the averments made in the application, the application is allowed. Delay is condoned. 2. As the acquisition proceeding is initiated in the year 1998, heard finally at admission stage with the consent of learned counsel for respective parties. 3. By this appeal, the appellant/original claimant assails the judgment and award dated 17.1.2014 passed by the learned 3rd Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in LAR No. 52/2011, whereby the learned reference court has enhanced the compensation amount determined by the SLAO, but not granted as claimed by the claimant. 4. The lands of the claimant admeasuring 72 R., 30 R. and 36 R. from Gat No. 119, 120/3 and 122/1, respectively situated at village Jamb, Taluka Bhoom, District Osmanbad was acquired for construction of percolation tank 2026:BHC-AUG:46545 CA 6199/17 2 at village Jamb. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be published on 5.2.1998 and the SLAO has declared the award on 28.3.2005 and granted compensation at the rate of Rs.34000/- per H. and Rs.37,000/- per H., respectively, for above acquired lands. After receipt of amount under protest, the claimants sought reference under section 18 of the Act as the SLAO has awarded very meager and inadequate compensation. Before the reference court, the claimants relied upon sale instance, Exh. 15 which is from the same village. The learned reference court granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 66400/- per H. for acquired lands. Being aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed by the original claimant. 5. Mr. R.D. Gaikwad h/f. Mr. S.G. Kawade, learned advocate for appellant vehemently submits that the learned reference court committed error, thereby not granting compensation as per the sale instance, Exh. 15. He submits that claimants relied upon the sale instance, Exh. 15 dated 28.11.1996, which is from the same village and by the said sale instance 81 R. land along with half share in well was sold for Rs.1,80,000/- and the said sale instance is prior to section 4 notification. However, the learned reference court without considering the same, has granted very meager compensation and therefore, prays to enhance the compensation for acquired lands. 6. Per contra, Mr. S.S. Dande, learned AGP for the State and Mr. T.B. Bhosle, learned counsel for acquiring body submit that the learned SLAO has rightly determined the compensation and prays to dismiss the appeal. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, with their able assistance I have gone through the record and proceedings and the CA 6199/17 3 impugned judgment and order. Before the reference court the claimants relied upon sale instance, Exh. 15 which is from the same village and as per the sale instance 81 R. land with half share in the well was sold for Rs.1,80,000/- and therefore, the learned reference court has treated the acquired land as seasonally irrigated land and has granted compensation at the rate of Rs.66,400/- per Acre. Admittedly, the acquired land is treated as dry land by the learned reference court. Once the reference court has relied upon the sale instance, Exh. 15, the learned reference court ought to have granted compensation for acquired land by treating the land as seasonally irrigated land at the rate of Rs.88,900/- per Acre. As the sale instance dated 28.11.1996 is prior to the notification under section 4 i.e. 5.2.1998, the claimant is also entitled to receive 10% escalation per year and therefore, by adding 20% escalation amount, the rate of acquired land comes to Rs.1,06,680/- per Acre and hence, the claimants are entitled to receive rate of Rs.1,06,680/- per Acre for their acquired lands. Hence, I pass the following order. O R D E R (I) The appeal is partly allowed. (II) The appellant/claimant is entitled to receive compensation at the rate of Rs.1,06,680/- per Acre for acquired lands. (III) The claimant shall be entitled to interest and other statutory benefits strictly in accordance with the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (4) Mh.L.J. 457. (IV) Claimant to pay the deficit court fee, if any, on enhanced amount. (IV) Award is modified accordingly. CA 6199/17 4 (V) It is made clear that if the claimants have not received the rental compensation, the claimants are at liberty to file appropriate application before the Collector, Osmanabad (Dharashiv) and the Collector is directed to decide the said application and pay compensation accordingly as per the Government policy available for paying rental compensation within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of the order by giving opportunity of hearing to the State and acquiring body. (VI) Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/