High Court
Legal Reasoning
1 36-CA 5391-2012.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5391 OF 2012 IN FAST/10501/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusGangadhar Vishwanath Hamne And Another.. RespondentsWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5392 OF 2012 IN FAST/10501/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10501 OF 2012….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5381 OF 2012 IN FAST/10440/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusNivrutti Kishan Kamble.. Respondent WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5382 OF 2012 IN FAST/10440/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10440 OF 2012 …. 1 of 10 2 36-CA 5391-2012.odt ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5407 OF 2012 IN FAST/10476/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusGiyanoba Kishan Kamble.. Respondent WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5408 OF 2012 IN FAST/10476/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10476 OF 2012 …. ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5395 OF 2012 IN FAST/10480/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusVishwanath Baba Hamne (Died)Through L.Rs. Mallikarjun Vishwanath Hanme.. Respondent WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5396 OF 2012 IN FAST/10480/2012 WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10480 OF 2012….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5398 OF 2012 IN FAST/10484/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. Applicants 2 of 10 3 36-CA 5391-2012.odtVersusTrimbak Vishwanath Hamne.. Respondent WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5397 OF 2012 IN FAST/10484/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10484 OF 2012 ….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5399 OF 2012 IN FAST/10487/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusAnkush Narayan Kamble.. RespondentWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5400 OF 2012 IN FAST/10487/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10487 OF 2012 ….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5401 OF 2012 IN FAST/10491/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusSambha Vithal Durge.. Respondent 3 of 10 4 36-CA 5391-2012.odtWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5402 OF 2012 IN FAST/10491/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10491 OF 2012 ….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5403 OF 2012 IN FAST/10495/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusLaxman Ramappa Hamne.. RespondentWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5404 OF 2012 IN FAST/10495/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10495 OF 2012 ….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5405 OF 2012 IN FAST/10498/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusShrawan Kishan Kamble.. Respondent WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5406 OF 2012 IN FAST/10498/2012WITH FIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10498 OF 2012 4 of 10 5 36-CA 5391-2012.odt …. AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5393 OF 2012 IN FAST/10504/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusShripati Sadba Surnar and another.. RespondentsWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5394 OF 2012 IN FAST/10504/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10504 OF 2012…. ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5409 OF 2012 IN FAST/10507/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusOsman Peersaheb Sayyed.. RespondentWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5410 OF 2012 IN FAST/10507/2012 WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10507 OF 2012….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5385 OF 2012 IN FAST/10510/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. Applicants 5 of 10 6 36-CA 5391-2012.odtVersusBhanudas Dnyanoba Hawmare and others.. RespondentsWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5386 OF 2012 IN FAST/10510/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10510 OF 2012….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5389 OF 2012 IN FAST/10519/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusDnyanoba Nagorao Barkume.. Respondent WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5390 OF 2012 IN FAST/10519/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10519 OF 2012….ANDCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5383 OF 2012 IN FAST/10523/2012The State Of Maharashtra And Another.. ApplicantsVersusDatta Shrawan Kamble.. Respondent 6 of 10 7 36-CA 5391-2012.odtWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5384 OF 2012 IN FAST/10523/2012WITHFIRST APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 10523 OF 2012Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for the Applicant No. 1.Mr. T. B. Bhosale, Advocate for the Applicant No. 2. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 08th JULY, 2025. PER COURT :- CIVIL APPLICATIONS (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) :1.Heard.2.For the reasons recorded in the civil applications, the civilapplications stand allowed. Delay of 1359 days stands condoned.Office to register first appeals. 3.The civil applications stand disposed of.FIRST APPEALS :1.These appeals are filed by the State and the acquiring bodyagainst the claimants whose land acquisition references came tobe allowed by way of impugned judgment and award dated22.04.2008 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge Senior 7 of 10 8 36-CA 5391-2012.odtDivision, Ahmedpur. All these appeals are arising out of the sameland acquisition proceedings initiated by the Government for theacquiring body. The notification under Section 4 (1) of the LandAcquisition Act came to be issued on 09.02.1999. The award waspassed on 12.11.1998. The land came to be acquired for UrdhvaManar Project. While acquiring land the compensation wasawarded at the rate of Rs. 60/- per sq. mtr. by the learned S.L.A.O.The claimants, therefore, filed land acquisition references claiminghigher amount. The learned Court partly accepted the case of theclaimants and enhanced the amount of compensation at the rateof Rs. 180/- per sq. mtr. The properties are house properties withplot/without plot.2.The learned A.G.P. so also learned advocate Mr. Bhosale forthe acquiring body vehemently submits that, the learnedReference Court has failed to appreciate that the compensationamount was rightly determined by the learned S.L.A.O. byconsidering the market rate prevalent at the time of acquisition.The learned Trial Court accepted the case of the claimants withoutthere being any satisfactory evidence. The learned A.G.P. as wellas Mr. Bhosale, learned advocate thus pray that the award be 8 of 10
Legal Reasoning
9 36-CA 5391-2012.odtquashed and set aside.3.This Court has gone through the judgment and award. Thelearned Reference Court specifically considered the market priceof properties in village Sangvi. The learned Reference Courtconsidered the evidence of one of the claimants namely DnyanobaNagorao Barkume. The learned Reference Court considered that,the population of village is around 3000. There are facilities ofhigher education available within radius of 09 Kms. The village asat distance of 09 Kms. from taluka. There is Balaghat SugarFactory at a distance of 03 Kms. One valuer Mr. Pokalwar wasexamined who stated in his evidence that price of open plot wasaround Rs. 500/- per sq. mtr. before acquisition of the propertiesof the claimants. The learned Reference Court thereafterconsidered that the house properties are constructed 10 yearsprior to the acquisition and awarded the rate.4.The learned Reference Court while considering saleinstances specifically considered two sale instances at Exh. 26 and27. It was considered that the plot of 40/50 ft. was sold forconsideration of Rs. 2,80,000/-. In another instance the property 9 of 10
Decision
10 36-CA 5391-2012.odtwas sold of 40/40 ft. plot for consideration of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Thelearned Reference Court by relying upon these sale deedsenhanced the amount. This Court does not find any perversity orillegality in the judgment. The learned Reference Court hasrightly considered the sale instances.5.Considering all above, this Court finds that, no case is madeout calling for interference at the hands of this Court. The firstappeals, therefore, stand dismissed. No order as to costs.CIVIL APPLICATIONS (FOR STAY) :.In view of disposal of the first appeals, nothing survives inthe civil applications for stay. The civil applications also standdisposed of.( KISHORE C. SANT, J. ) P.S.B. 10 of 10