abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 422 OF 1996 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant V/s 1. Balaram Shankar Bahira, deceased through his lega representatives 1/1 jamnabai Balaram Bahira 1/2 Jagadshi Balaram Bahira 1/3 Ram Balaram Bahira 1/4 Yeshwant Balaram Bahira 1/5 Bhagwan Balaram Bahira 2. Dharma Shankar Bahira 3. Eknath Shankar Bahira 4. Sou. Sitabai Kamlya Waghikar 5. Sou. Mankabai Janardan Koli 6. Smt. Raghubai Shankar Bahira Mr.A.R. Patil for the appellant. Mr.D.N. Salvi for respondents nos.2 to 5. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 30TH SEPTEMBER 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30th March 1994 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge in a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act"). 2. The land of the respondents bearing survey - 2 - no.344 admeasuring 6550 sq.mts. situated at village Takka, Taluka Panvel was acquired by the appellant State for New Bombay Project. A notification under section 4 of the Act was published on 3rd February 1970 for acquisition of survey no.344 along with several other lands including the adjoining lands. The Land Acquisition Officer published his award on 19th March 1985 awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq.mt. Aggrieved by the award, the respondents applied to the Collector for reference under section 18 of the Act. The matter was accordingly referred by the Collector to the District Court at Raigad. By a judgment and order dated 30th March 1994, the reference court held that the market value of the land was Rs.18/- per sq.mt. and accordingly computed and awarded the compensation. Aggrieved by this decision, the State has filed the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents states that along with the respondents, several other adjoining land owners, whose lands were also acquired under the same award, had also challenged the award and made applications for enhancement. In the said applications also, the reference court enhanced the compensation. First Appeal Nos.229 of 1989, 250 of 1989 and 276 of 1993 were filed against the decisions of the reference court. By a common judgment and order dated 17th July - 3 - 2000 passed in First Appeal No.229 of 1989 with First Appeal No.250 of 1989, this Court held that the market value of the land, which is situated near to land of respondents, was Rs.20/- per sq.mt. and accordingly passed the order. Similarly, in First Appeal No.276 of 1993 decided on 7th March 2005, this Court held that the market value of another land in the vicinity of the land of respondents was Rs.20/- per sq. mt. and accordingly passed the order. Learned A.G.P. admits that the lands covered by First Appeal Nos.229 of 1989, 250 of 1989 and 276 of 1993 are similarly situated as the land of respondents and were situated in the same vicinity and covered by the same acquisition. In view of this, the market value of the land of respondents would have to be held to be Rs.20/- per sq.mt. The reference court has awarded compensation only at the rate of Rs.18/- per sq. mt. which is in fact a bit less than the market value. But as the respondents have not filed any appeal, the decision of the reference court has become final qua them. In the circumstances, the respondents would not be entitled to any enhancement but only entitled to confirmation of the impugned order. 4. For the reasons mentioned above, there is no merit in the appeal which is hereby dismissed with costs which are quantified at Rs.5000/-. - 4 - (D.G. KARNIK, J.)