1 F.A.st.10032.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 10032 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra ...APPELLANT. VERSUS 1. Chintaman Rambhau Darphe and another. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri. K.S.Patil, A.G.P. for Appellant-State ... CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 27TH JULY, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant-State raising exception to the Judgment and Award passed by 1st Ad-hoc Additional District Judge Beed, on 24.08.2005, in Land Acquisition Reference NO. 24 of 2000. 2. Agricultural land belonging to claimants ad measuring 00.52 R out of land Survey No. 5 of village Irgaon, Tq. Georai, District Beed came to be acquired by the State, for construction of percolation tank at village Dagadgaon. Notification Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 18.03.1993 and after following procedure prescribed in the Land 2 F.A.st.10032.10 Acquisition Act, Land Acquisition Officer passed award on 25.01.1996. The Special Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation in respect of acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 180/- per R. 3. The claimants-respondents herein being dissatisfied with judgment and award tendered application seeking reference of the mater to the Civil Court for determination of the market value of the acquired land. The claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per R. 4. In order to substantiate their claim, claimants have placed reliance on the oral evidence of claimants, as well as other witnesses to prove the sale transactions. The claimants also placed on record the documentary evidence in the form of comparable sale instances. The sale instances at Exhs. 17 and 18 are in respect of area to the extent of 22 R each. The land covered by sale deed has been sold for consideration of Rs.15000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs.681/- per R. The sale transaction is of the year 1984. The Reference Court considering the difference in quality and fertility of the soil scaled down the compensation by 40% for determining the price of the acquired land. The Reference Court has also considered the aspect that sale transactions are of the year 1984, whereas notification under section 4 of the Act, in the instant matter came to be issued in the year 1993 and the 3 F.A.st.10032.10 Reference Court has considered the market price of the land notified in the year 1993, by allowing increase at 10% per year while evaluating price of acquired land. On consideration of the sale instances, the Reference Court reached to the conclusion that market value of the land shall be Rs.740/- Per R. The view adopted by the Reference Court appears to be reasonable and proper and based on consideration of the guidelines issued by the Apex Court and High Courts for determining the compensation of the acquired lands. 5. On perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court and also copies of the evidence made available by learned AGP appearing for the State while arguing the matter, I am of the view that Reference Court has adopted reasonable approach in the matter, therefore, I do not deem it appropriate to cause interference in the first appeal. The appeal presented by the State-Government is devoid of substance, hence stands dismissed. Sd/- [ R.M.BORDE, J. ] MTK 4 F.A.st.10032.10