THE STATE OF MAH THR COLLECTOR AND ANR v. VENKAT MADHAVRAO PATIL
FA/656/2015 · 2026-10-06
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17336 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17336 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
311-FA-656-15.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 311 FIRST APPEAL NO. 656 OF 2015 The State Of Mah Thr Collector And Anr VERSUS Venkat Madhavrao Patil …… Mr. S.S. Dande, AGP for Appellant-State ……
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 06 OCTOBER, 2026 PER COURT :
1. Heard learned AGP for the appellant-State.
2. By this appeal, the appellant-State takes exception to the common
Judgment and Award dated 29.04.2010 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in Land Acquisition Reference No.273 of 2008 (Old LAR No.36/2003).
3. The lands admeasuring 68 R from Survey Nos.46/A and 46/B, belonging to the claimant and situated at village Koregaon, Taluka Omerga, District Osmanabad, was acquired for the purpose of construction of Minor Irrigation Tank at Koregaon by issuing Section 4 notification. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per Hectare. The claimant received the said amount under protest, reserving the right to claim enhanced compensation. 2026:BHC-AUG:47213
311-FA-656-15.odt 2
4. Before the learned Reference Court, the claimant relied upon a sale instance from village Omerga, which is a nearby village, relating to land from Survey No.268. The said sale instance is of the year 1998 and records the consideration of Rs.23,333/-. The learned Reference Court took into
consideration the said sale instance and determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.45,000/- per Acre. Having regard to the sale instance relied upon by the claimant and the reasons recorded by the learned Reference Court, this Court finds that the enhancement granted is just, proper and reasonable. The compensation awarded by the learned Reference Court cannot be said to be excessive or exorbitant. No case is made out for interference with the impugned Judgment and Award.
5. The First Appeal is dismissed.
6. Pending civil application, if any, also stands disposed of..
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE S P Rane