fast9578.10 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 9578 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6194 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and another ...Appellant Versus Babarao s/o Narayanrao Kanwate (Died through L.Rs.) Gangadhar s/o Babarao Kanwate and others ...Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 9640 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6192 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and another ...Appellant Versus Narhari s/o Raosaheb Khidse and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP, for the appellants Mr. J.R. Patil, advocate for the respondents ..... CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. DATED: 18TH JULY, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 These are the appeals presented by the State raising exception to the common judgment and award passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedpur camp at Udgir, on 2.12.2008 in fast9578.10 -2- Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 256 of 2001 and 257 of 2001. 2 The agricultural lands belonging to the claimants admeasuring 40 R each out of survey Nos. 28/2 and 28/1 situate at village Talegaon, Tq. Ahmedpur, District Latur came to be acquired for the purpose of extension of Gaothan of village Talegaon. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 21.09.1989 and after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, an award came to be passed on 15.5.1990. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ ` 6800/- per acre for acquired lands. 3 The claimants being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, offered by the Special Land Acquisition, Officer tendered separate applications seeking reference of the matters to the Civil Court for determination of proper market value of the acquired lands. The claimants in order to substantiate their claims, have placed reliance on the evidence in the form of comparable sale instances, apart from the oral evidence of the claimants. Exh.25 is the sale deed in respect of 1-1/2 R land. The Reference court did not consider the evidence in the form of sale instance at Exh.25 for the reason that the said transaction is in respect of very small piece of land. Another sale fast9578.10 -3- deed is at Exh.26 in respect of alienation of 28 R land, which has been sold for a consideration of ` 28,000/- i.e. ` 1000/- per R. The said sale instance is of the year 1987 i.e. prior to issuance of Section 4 notification. It has also been deposed by the claimants that the said sale instance pertains to the land situate at village Zari, which is adjacent to the village of the claimants. Considering the fact that the acquired lands situate in the nearby vicinity of village Zari, the Reference Court on appreciation of material placed on record arrived at a conclusion that proper market value of the acquired lands shall not be less than ` 900/- per R. It is an admitted position that acquired land is just adjacent to the village and as such has been taken in possession for extension of Gaothan. 4 Considering the totality of the circumstances and after having gone through the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court, I am of the opinion that the view adopted by the Reference Court appears to be reasonable and proper. The learned AGP appearing of the appellant-State has also made available the copies of the relevant record for perusal while arguing the appeals. Considering the fact that the area acquired comprises of small pieces of land admeasuring 40 R each and considering the material evidence made available for perusal, I do not deem it necessary to cause interference in the fast9578.10 -4- present appeals. The appeals devoid of substance and the same stand dismissed. 5 In view of dismissal of first appeals, pending civil application Nos. 6194 and 6192 of 2010, seeking stay to the impugned judgment and award, do not survive for further consideration and the same stand disposed of accordingly. ( R.M. BORDE. J.) rlj/