Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15930 (BOM)

SHAMSUNDAR RAMBALLABH KABARA v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

FA/3177/2008 · 2026-10-01

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Tauseef 1 of 2 901-FA.3177.2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 901 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3177 OF 2008 SHAMSUNDAR RAMBALLABH KABARA VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ... Mr. S. S. Rathi, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 1st OCTOBER, 2026 P.C.:- 1. Since the acquisition proceedings pertain to the year 1987, the appeal is heard finally with the consent of the learned Advocates for the respective parties. 2. By the present appeal, the Appellant/Claimant is challenging the judgment and award dated 29.04.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga in LAR No.195/2005, whereby the learned Reference Court refused to enhance the compensation to the extent claimed by the Appellant/Claimant. 3. Learned Advocate for the Appellant/Claimant submits that this Court has taken a view in First Appeal Nos.153 of 2009 and 4182 of 2008 decided on 14.08.2026 arising out of same project i.e. Benitura Medium Project. 4. Upon perusal of order passed by this Court in First Appeal 2026:BHC-AUG:46911 Tauseef 2 of 2 901-FA.3177.2008 Nos.153 of 2009 and 4182 of 2008, I am inclined to adopt the same view in the present appeals. Therefore, present appeals are disposed of accordingly. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:- O R D E R (i) The First Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The Claimant is entitled to compensation @ of Rs.1,20,000/- per Acre for irrigated land and to that extent, impugned award stands modified. (iii) The Claimant shall be entitled to all consequential statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. (iv) The Claimant shall be entitled to interest under Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as the case may be, strictly in accordance with the principles laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Kailas Shiva Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457. (v) Save and except the aforesaid modification, the Judgment and Award passed by the learned Reference Court stands confirmed. (vi) The Claimant shall pay the deficit Court-fees, if any. (vii) The modified award be drawn accordingly. (viii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)