1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR First Appeal No. 258 of 1995 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Benefitted Zone, Yavatmal i.e. the Collector, Yavatmal. -- Appellants ( Ori. Respondents) Versus Ganesh s/o Punjaji Buchke, Aged about 50 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o Chincholi, Tq. Digras, District Yavatmal -- Respondent ( Ori. Petitioner) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. A.S. Sonare, A.G.P. for appellants. Mr. S.D. Patil, Counsel for respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : AUGUST 06 , 2009 . Heard Shri Sonare, A.G.P. for appellants and Shri Patil for the respondent. The learned Counsel for the parties have informed this Court that First Appeal bearing No.283/95, in which identical issues were involved has been deiced by this Court by the Judgment dated 11th of February, 2009. It is 2 informed to this Court by the learned Counsel for the parties that the Section 4 notification was issued in the present case as also the decided case on 6-3-1986. A common award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer in both these cases on 4-3-1989. In both the cases the reference Court had enhanced the compensation and granted it at the rate of Rs. 45,000/- per hector. This Court has, however, by the judgment dated 11th of February, 2009 in First Appeal No.283/95 upheld the judgment passed by the reference Court in that case. This Court has held that grant of compensation at the rate of Rs. 45,000/- was just and proper. 2. Hence, for the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 11th of February, 2009 in First Appeal No.283/95, this first appeal is also dismissed with no orders as to cost. JUDGE pma.