946-CA-4304-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 946 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4304 OF 2026 IN FA/1556/2014 Babasaheb Yogiraj Sarwade VERSUS The Executive Engineer, M.s.e.b. (local), Construction And Repair Division, Osmanabad WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5157 OF 2026 IN X-OBJST/12904/2026 Babasaheb Yogiraj Sarwade. VERSUS The Executive Engineer, M.s.e.b. (local), Construction And Repair Division, Osmanabad And Ors. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 1556 OF 2014 The Executive Engineer, M.s.e.b. (local), Construction And Repair Division, Osmanabad VERSUS Babasaheb Yogiraj Sarwade WITH X-OBJECTION (ST) NO. 12904 OF 2026 Babasaheb Yogiraj Sarwade. VERSUS The Executive Engineer, M.s.e.b. (local), Construction And Repair Division, Osmanabad And Ors. ... Mr. Mahendra Kolpe for the original claimant. Mr. V. K. Kotecha, AGP for State. Mr. Sanjay V Mundhe for the Appellant. ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 6 AUGUST 2026 Shubham 2026:BHC-AUG:35643 946-CA-4304-2026.doc P. C.: CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5157 OF 2026 IN X-OBJECTION (ST) NO.12904 OF 2026 1. Present Civil Application is filed for condonation of delay of 4143 days in filing X-objection. Considering the averments made in the application, the same is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’. FIRST APPEAL NO. 1556 OF 2014 AND X-OBJECTION (ST) NO. 12904 OF 2026 2. The First Appeal No.1556 of 2014 and X-Objection (St.) No.12904 of 2026 are not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board. 3. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 1999, the First Appeal and the X-objection are being heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 4. The Appellant/acquiring body and the objectors/claimants are assailing the order dated 31st August 2012, passed by Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Osmanabad in LAR No.293 of 2004, whereby the learned Reference Court enhanced the compensation in favour of the claimants, but not to the extent claimed by the objectors/claimants. 5. The land of the claimants from Gat No.443 situated at village Padoli(L), Tq Kallam, Dist. Dharashiv was acquired for construction of 33 KV sub-station. The possession was taken on 8th November 1999 i.e. prior to Section 4 notification which was published on 20th December 2001. Notification under Section 6 was published on 20th April 2002. The award Shubham 946-CA-4304-2026.doc was passed on 24th March 2003 thereby awarding compensation @Rs.315/- per R. The claimants had claimed Rs.20,000/- per R for the acquired land and the learned Reference Court enhanced the same to Rs.6000/- per R. 6. Learned counsel for the acquiring body/Appellant submits that the compensation awarded by the LAO was adequate and the same was erroneously enhanced by the learned Reference Court without considering the fact that the sale instances below Exhs.19 and 20 relied upon by the learned Reference Court were pertaining to very small piece of land. The learned Reference Court has enhanced the compensation to an exorbitant extent. Learned Reference Court has not considered the fact that the acquired land was agricultural land whereas the land in said sale instances was non-agricultural land, thus both the lands differed in the nature fundamentally. The learned Reference Court has granted interest under Section 28 from the date of taking possession which is contrary to the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari (2016(3) Mh.L.J. 457). Thus, he prays that the Appeal be allowed and the X-objection be dismissed. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the objectors/claimants submits that the learned Reference Court has rightly relied upon sale instances below Exhs.19 and 20, NA permission dated 24th March 2006 below Exh.21, certificate of tax assessment of the year 1991-92 below Exh.22, issued by Grampanchayat and 7/12 extract below Exh.23. He further submits that Shubham 946-CA-4304-2026.doc though the learned Reference Court has relied upon the said sale instances, it erroneously applied excessive deduction of 50% to the market value in the sale instances thereby reducing the market value of the acquired land to a greater extent which is impermissible in law. Therefore, he prays that the amount of compensation be enhanced and Appeal filed by the acquiring body be dismissed. 8. Having heard rival submissions of the learned counsel and upon perusal of record and proceeding it is clear that the possession was taken prior to the date of notification. The learned Reference Court has relied upon sale instances produced by claimants below Exhs.19 and 20 of the year 1998 and 1997 respectively. By sale instance below Exh.19, 800 sq. ft. open plot was sold for Rs.8000/-. Therefore, to calculate the market value of 1R land, the learned Reference Court added Rs.2000/- (¼ of sale consideration of Rs.8000/-) to the market value of 800 sq. ft. land which came to Rs.10,000/- per R. Thereafter, learned Reference Court granted 10% escalation per year for three years thereby reaching to the market value of Rs.13,000/- per R. In the similar fashion, the learned Reference Court calculated the market value of sale instance below Exh.20 to the tune of Rs.10,500/- per R. Upon taking average of both the market values i.e. Rs.11,500/-, the learned Reference Court applied 50% deduction towards smaller size of the land in sale instances and their location thereby reaching market value of Rs.6000/- per R for the acquired land. Shubham 946-CA-4304-2026.doc 9. The perusal of record reveals that the acquired land was agricultural land whereas the land in the sale instance was non-agricultural land. Therefore, the deduction of 50% applied by the learned Reference Court is appropriate. 10. Sofar as the issue of grant of interest under Section 28 is concerned, the same shall be granted from the date of award as per Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra). The learned Reference Court has granted component under Section 23 (1A) from the date of taking possession, which shall be granted from the date of notification and to these extents only the impugned award warrants modification. 11. Sofar as the issue of rental compensation is concerned, the claimants are at liberty to file appropriate application before the Collector, Dharashiv. The Collector, Dharashiv shall decide the same as per prevailing Government policy, in accordance with law. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:- O R D E R i. The First Appeal is partly allowed. ii. The X-objection is dismissed. iii. The claimants shall be entitled to interest under Section 28 from the date of award as per Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra) and to that extent clause 2 of the operative part of the impugned award stands modified. iv. The claimants shall be entitled to additional component under Shubham 946-CA-4304-2026.doc Section 23(1A) from the date of notification and to that extent clause 3 of the operative part of the impugned award stands modified. v. Rest of the awards passed by the learned Reference Court is confirmed. vi. Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of. [SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.] Shubham