fast3757.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3757 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Shardabai Manohar Namne .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3747 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Vithal Devba Damble & ors .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3604 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Mariba Bhujanga Kamble .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.3738 OF 2011 fast3757.11 2 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Dnyanoba Gangaram Surner .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.3670 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Sitaram Gangaram Wadkar .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3678 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Awadaji Bapunna Muknar .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3690 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS fast3757.11 3 VERSUS Namdeo Gangaram Wadkear .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3702 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Gangaram Sambhaji Kamble & anr .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3723 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Shivram Sangram Yerme .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3733 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Narayan Bhimrao Yerme .. RESPONDENT fast3757.11 4 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3657 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Bhagwan Nagorao Kamble .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3710 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Shrawan Kishan Kamble .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 3761 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Pandurang Masnaji Surnar .. RESPONDENT Mr. K.S. Patil , AGP for the State. CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : AUGUST 2, 2011. fast3757.11 5 PER COURT : 1 These are the appeals raising exception to the judgment and award passed in LAR NO. 248/2004 and other companion matters decided on 26-4-2007. 2 The lands belonging to the respective claimants comprising of very small pieces ranging between 7 R to 71 R came to be acquired by the State for construction of Urdhav Manyar Project Pump House and Nalika at Sangvi Tq. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acqusition Act was issued on 6-1-2000 and, after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, award came to be passed on 20-9-2002. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 449/- per R. Claimants being dis-satisfied with the amount of compensation offered by the 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. Claimants claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,00,000/- per R. 3 In order to substantiate their claim, claimants placed reliance on oral fast3757.11 6 as well as documentary evidence. Documentary evidence consists of comparable sale instances. Exh. 25 is the sale instance in respect of land admeasuring 80 R from the same village which has been alienated for consideration of Rs. 2,00,000/- on 1-2-1996. Sale instance is a pre-notification sale and the value of the land reflected from the sale instance comes to Rs. 1,00,000/- per R. Reference court, on consideration of evidence, oral as well as documentary, placed on record by the claimants, reached conclusion that the market price of the acquired lands comes to Rs. 48,000/- per acre i.e. Rs. 1,125/- per R. 4 I have perused the judgment and award passed by the reference court and heard arguments advanced by learned AGP for the State. I have also gone through the evidence, copies of which are made available by the learned AGP while arguing the appeals. On consideration of the relevant aspects, I am convinced that the view adopted by the reference court is reasonable and proper. Enhancement in the amount of compensation directed by the reference court is also quite meager. It is also to be taken note of that very small pieces of lands admeasuring 7 R, 8 R, 14 R, 15R or 25 R have been acquired by the State entitling the claimants to receive a very meager amount towards compensation. In view of the reasons recorded fast3757.11 7 above, appeals do not deserve favourable consideration and stand dismissed. 5 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE,J.) dyb