1 F.A. ST. 16378/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23536/2008 The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Parbhani and others ...Appellants. Versus Dineshlal s/o Shankerlal Jaiswal and others. ...Respondents. Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for the appellants. Mr.S.J. Gaike, Advocate for respondents. CORAM : SMT. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : 12th Sept., 2011. PER COURT : 1. At this stage, the appeal is taken up for admission and final hearing. 2. Admit. 3. The appeal is heard finally at the stage of admission by consent as short issue is involved. The appeal is filed by the State against the order dated 11/05/2007 passed by Adhoc District Judge-2, Parbhani, enhancing the amount of compensation. The Government by notification dated 19/07/1996 issued under section 4 of the Act, has acquired the suit land. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, at the time of acquisition has fixed the amount for compensation as Rs. 34,700/- per hector. Total land admeasuring 5 H 55 R from village Deola Tq. Selu District Parbhani was acquired. Reference was filed under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and when the reference Court enhanced the amount of the compensation by fixing it, at R. 2 F.A. ST. 16378/2009 1,25,000/- per hector. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed. 2. Perused the order passed by reference Court. The respondents have claimed amount of compensation at Rs.5,00,000/- per hector in the reference. The reference Court has considered the sale instances which were relied by the State as well as by the respondents. These sale instances are referred in paras no.16 and 17 of the judgment. The land is acquired in July, 1996 and the sale instances relied on, are mainly of the year 1995. Further sale instance of the year 1996 is also relied in paras no. 21 and 22 of the judgment. The reference Court has considered the non-agricultural potentiality of the land and has rightly fixed the price of the compensation, at Rs.1,25,000/-. There is no need to interfere in the matter. Hence, by consent at the stage of admission only, the appeal stands dismissed. ORDER The appeal is dismissed. C.A. No. 7492/2010 for stay is also dismissed. [SMT. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] ts k/2011/Sept.12/fast16378.09