✦ Bombay High Court

FA 4009/081 & Ors. v. BABASAHEB SAHEBRAO SHENDGE..Advocate & Anr.

Civil Application No. 1847 of 2008SIDDHESHWAR S THOMBRE

Case at a glance

Bench
SIDDHESHWAR S THOMBRE

Outcome

Dismissed

Hence, the present appeals are dismissed

Key paragraphs

  • Para 77. In view of dismissal of the appeals, pending civil applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of accordingly. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )ssc/

Judgment

FA 4009/08 & Ors.1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD7 FIRST APPEAL NO. 4009 OF 2008WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1847 OF 2008 IN FA/4009/2008THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ZILLA PARISHAD, LATUR.VERSUSBABASAHEB SAHEBRAO SHENDGE AND ANR...Advocate for Appellant : Mr. V.D. Hon, Sr. counsel i/b. Mr. A.V. HonAGP for Respondent/State : Mr. D.R. Korde ...WITHFIRST APPEAL NO. 4013 OF 2008WITHFIRST APPEAL NO. 4011 OF 2008WITHFIRST APPEAL NO. 4010 OF 2008WITHFIRST APPEAL NO. 3991 OF 2008 TO FIRST APPEAL NO. 4008 OF 2008WITHFIRST APPEAL NO. 4012 OF 2008…CORAM :SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.Dated: August 24, 2026PER COURT :-

1.

FA Nos. 3991 to 4008 of 2008 and FA No. 4012/2008 are not onboard. Taken on board.

2.

Heard Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior counsel i/b. Mr. A.V. Hon for theappellant/acquiring body and Mr. D.R. Korde, learned AGP for State.

3.

By these appeals, the appellant/acquiring body assail the Judgmentand awards passed by the reference court in different land acquisition references.

4.

Both the learned advocates submit that the compensation enhanced by the learned Reference Court does not exceed four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. FA 4009/08 & Ors.25. In view of the aforesaid submissions and having regard to the policy decision of the State Government contained in Government ResolutionNo.Sankirna-2014/Prak. Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4 dated 03.11.2016 with Corrigendum dated 23.02.2017 and 13.08.2018 to the said GovernmentResolution, took a decision not to challenge the reference, if compensationis enhanced only upto four times.

Operative part

6.

Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the impugned orders. 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. )ssc/

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Civil Application No. 1847 of 2008). ← Search more judgments