Dilwale 1 255-fa-2281-13.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 255 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2281 OF 2013 The State Of Maharashtra And Anr VERSUS Suryabhan Sopan Birajdar WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2280 OF 2013 The State Of Maharashtra And Anr VERSUS Sangram Virappa Kallure WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2284 OF 2013 The State Of Maharashtra And Anr VERSUS Ram Sopan Biradar WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2285 OF 2013 The State Of Maharashtra And Anr VERSUS Bhagirathibai Manik Kallure WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2283 OF 2013 The State Of Maharashtra And Anr VERSUS Narsing Virappa Kallure … AGP for Appellants/State : Mr. B. A. Shinde Advocate for Respondents : Mr. H. B. Nandgavale h/f Mr. V. G. Sakolkar ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. 2026:BHC-AUG:46985 Dilwale 2 255-fa-2281-13.odt DATE : 29.09.2026 PER COURT : 1. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 2002, the appeals are being heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. By these appeals, the appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 05.03.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Udgir in LAR Nos.626, 627, 629, 630 and 631 of 2010, whereby the learned Reference Court enhanced the compensation. 3. The lands of the claimants from village Dhondihipperga Tal. Udgir Dist. Latur were acquired for the purpose of Percolation Tank No.4. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) was published on 14.11.2002, award under Section 11 of the Act was passed on 02.08.2004. 4. Learned AGP submits that the compensation granted by the learned Reference Court is within four times the compensation granted by the SLAO. 5. In fact the State Government vide Government Resolution No.Sankirna-2014/Prak.Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4 dated 3rd November 2016 with Corrigenda dated 23rd February 2017 and 13th August 2018 to the said Government Resolution, took a decision not to challenge the reference, if compensation is enhanced only upto four times. Dilwale 3 255-fa-2281-13.odt 6. Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the impugned award. Hence, the present Appeals are dismissed. 7. In view of dismissal of the Appeals, pending Civil Applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of accordingly. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ]