1 F.A.NOS.14, 15 & 16 OF 1995. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL NO.14 OF 1995. 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (M.I.), Osmanabad. ...Appellants. (Ori.Respondents) VERSUS Gana Shamrao Shitole, (Died) His L.R's. Bharat s/o Gana Shitole, Age: 21 years, Occ:Agri., R/o: Naigaon, Tq.Kallam, Dist.Osmanabad. ...Respondent. (Ori.Claimant.) WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.15 OF 1995. 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (M.I.), Osmanabad. ...Appellants. (Ori.Respondents) 2 F.A.NOS.14, 15 & 16 OF 1995. VERSUS Nagnath s/o Bapu Teli, Age: 65 years, Occ:Agri., R/o: Naigaon, Tq.Kallam, Dist.Osmanabad. ...Respondent. (Ori.Claimant.) WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.16 OF 1995. 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Special Land Acquisition Officer, (M.I.), Osmanabad. ...Appellants. (Ori.Respondents) VERSUS Gyanoba s/o Bhagwan Garad, Age: 52 years, Occ:Agri., R/o: Naigaon, Tq.Kallam, Dist.Osmanabad. ...Respondent. (Ori.Claimant.) 3 F.A.NOS.14, 15 & 16 OF 1995. ... Mr.N.R.Shaikh, AGP for the appellants in all the appeals. Mr.R.L.Chintalwar, Advocate for the respondents in all the appeals. ... CORAM: A.V.NIRGUDE,J. Date : 29th September, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. All the three appeals can be decided by this common judgment. 2. The State of Maharashtra has filed these appeals against the common judgment and award passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in Land Acquisition Reference Nos.100/1992, 102/1992 and 110/1992. 3. The respondents filed the Land Acquisition References under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation in respect of their lands situated at village Naigaon, Taluka: Kalam, Dist. Osmanabad. The respondents' lands, admeasured in the range of 15 R to 81 R and were acquired for the purpose of Minor Irrigation Project at village Raigavhan. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 16,000/- per 4 F.A.NOS.14, 15 & 16 OF 1995. Hector. The respondents/ Claimants demanded enhancement. 4. The respondents/Claimants adduced evidence before the Reference Court and accepting the same, the reference Court awarded compensation @ Rs.25,000/- per acre. The appellants/State challenged the correctness of this judgment. 5. The question is whether the compensation awarded by the Reference Court, is correct and lawful ? The answer is in affirmative. 6. The learned AGP, appearing for the appellants, submitted that the Reference Court should not have relied upon the sale instance produced and proved by the respondents / claimants. He said that the sale instance is not relevant because the said land was not situated at village Naigaon, Dist.Osmanabad. Secondly, he argued that the sale instance land was irrigated one, whereas he said, the lands under reference, were not irrigated and so there is no parity between the sale instance and the lands in question. 7. The first objection of the learned AGP about the distance between the land of sale instance and the reference lands, is squarely met by the learned Judge of the Lower Court. He held that 5 F.A.NOS.14, 15 & 16 OF 1995. the distance between the two lands was one to two K.M. and so the lands are comparable. 8. As regards the second objection, learned Judge of the Lower Court, specifically observed that even the lands in questions were cultivated as irrigated lands, the lands were utilised for taking crops like sugarcane. The sugar cane crop was supplied with water drawn from wells. The water was drawn with the help of electric pumps. The learned Judge of the Lower Court also took into account the fact that village Naigaon was well developed having facility like Bank, Post Office, availability of electricity, school etc., and having connectivity by road. 9. Having regard to the discussion in the impugned Judgment, I find no reason to interfere in the same. All these appeals should, therefore, fail. All these appeals are dismissed. (A.V.NIRGUDE,J.) lkp