CA 13956/11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 349 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13956 OF 2011 IN FAST/25525/2011 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VERSUS DATTU VISHWANATH LATE AND ORS ... Advocate for Applicant/State : Mr. A.D. Wange ... WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13957 OF 2011 IN FAST/25525/2011 … CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. Dated : September 30, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. In civil application filed for condonation of delay, heard the learned AGP for the State. 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 AGP. 3. By this appeal, the appellant/State assails the judgment and award dated 9.1.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar in LAR No. 642/2003, whereby the learned reference court has enhanced the compensation. 4. The lands of the claimants admeasuring 1 H. 41 R. bagayat and 86 R. Potkharab land was acquired. After publication of notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, the SLAO has declared the award and granted very meager compensation and therefore, after receipt of amount under protest, the claimants sought reference under section 18 of the Act in which the learned reference court has enhanced the amount. 2026:BHC-AUG:46784 CA 13956/11 2 5. Mr. A.D. Wange, learned AGP submits that the learned reference court has granted exorbitant compensation and therefore, prays to set aside the impugned award passed by the learned reference court. 6. Having heard the learned AGP, I have gone through the record and proceedings. The learned reference court after relying on the order passed in LAR No. 641/2003 granted compensation at the rate of Rs.1653/- per R. for Bagayat land and Rs.206/- per R. for Potkharab land. As the order passed in other LAR cannot be binding precedent, but the same can be used as guiding principle. It is also not brought to my notice that the order passed in LAR No. 641/2003 is challenged or set aside by this Court. Therefore, this court is of the view that the reference court has not granted any exorbitant compensation. Hence, 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/