1 fa283 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.283 OF 1995 The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant vs. 1 Motiram Budhya Madhavi 2 Kashinath Budhya Madhavi ...Respondents Mr.A.R.Patil, A.G.P for the appellant None for the respondents CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : FEBRUARY 14,2011 ORAL JUDGEMENT: 1 Heard learned A.G.P appearing for the State Government. The challenge in this appeal is to the Judgment and Award dated 19th August 1991 passed by the District Court in a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The acquired land admeasures 8676 sq. meters situated at at village Dive, Taluka Thane, District Thane. On 3rd February 1970, a notification under section 4 of the said Act was issued by the State Government. The land was notified for the public purpose of setting up satellite city of New Mumbai. It appears that the land acquisition reference no.24 of 1988 was decided by the District Court relating to the lands at village Dive notified on the same date for the same purpose. In the said reference, market value was fixed at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. meter. Therefore, by the impugned Award the market value was fixed at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter. 2 First Appeal no.277 of 1995 and other connected appeals were decided by this Court on 24th September 2 fa283 2009. The said appeals were preferred by the State of Maharashtra for challenging the Awards made in references under section 18 of the said Act relating to lands at village Dive which were notified for acquisition on the same date for the same public purpose. In case of the some of the lands, the market value was fixed by the District Court at the rate of Rs.12/- per sq. meter. This Court held that the market value of the acquired lands at village Dive was Rs.10/- per sq. meter. 3 In the present case, the market value has been fixed at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq. meter. There is no dispute about the grant of statutory benefits. 4 In view of the aforesaid decision of this Court, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE