( 1 ) fast23439.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23439 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12224 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Santram Nivarti Kamble .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23436 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12226 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Bharat Vithal Dhumal .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23391 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12228 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Rajaram Bhagwat Dhumal .. Respondent ( 2 ) fast23439.10 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23448 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12230 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Rangrao Wamanrao Patil .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23451 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12232 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Pandurang Hanmant Dhumal and Anr .. Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23442 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12234 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Waman Bhaurao Patil .. Respondent ( 3 ) fast23439.10 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 23433 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12237 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Appellants Versus Devidas Kundlik Kirvale .. Respondent Mr. S.N. Kendre, A.G.P. for the appellant/State. CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATED : 01.08.2011 P.C. :- 1. These are the appeals presented by the State raising exception to the judgment and award passed by the Adhoc District Judge-2, Latur, in a group of Land Acquisition Reference bearing No. 312 of 2000 and other companion applications decided on 05.07.2008. 2. The agricultural lands belonging to the claimants comprising of small pieces came to be acquired for construction of percolation tank at village Yeli, Tal. Ausa, ( 4 ) fast23439.10 Dist. Latur. The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 27.06.1996 and after following procedure prescribed under the Act, the award came to be declared by the Land Acquisition Officer on 28.08.1998. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation in respect of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 265/- per R. The claimants being dissatisfied with the offer of compensation amount by the S.L.A.O., tendered separate application seeking reference of the the matter to the Civil Court for determination of market value of the acquired lands. The claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre. 3. In order to substantiate their claims, the claimants led evidence of those witnesses who proved sale instanced placed on record. The sale instance at Exh. 25 is dated 21.03.1992 between one Bhaurao and Vithal in respect of alienation of 35 R land which has been sold for consideration of Rs. 56,000/- per R. The land is out of Gat No. 167 of village Yeli, Tal. Ausa. The market price of the land referred at Exh.25 comes to Rs. 1600/- per R. The Reference ( 5 ) fast23439.10 Court found on perusal of the map that the land covered by sale instance as well as the land under the acquisition are in the close proximity but there is difference in the quality and fertility of the soil. The sale instance at Exh.25 is in respect of the land which is of better quality than the acquired lands. The Reference Court gave adequate importance to these aspects and prescribed the market value of the acquired land by giving discount about 50% and fixed same at Rs. 795/- per R. The view adopted by the Reference Court appears to be reasonable and proper. On perusal of the judgment delivered by the Reference Court and on scrutiny of the copies of evidence made available by learned A.G.P. while arguing the appeals, I am convinced that the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court does not need any interference. The enhancement in the amount of compensation awarded by the Reference Court is quite moderate. The lands taken in possession by the State belonging to the claimants/ agriculturist are comprising of small pieces of lands thereby entitling them to receive paltry sum. 4. In view of the aspects, as noted above, I do not ( 6 ) fast23439.10 find any merit in these appeals presented by the State. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed. 5. All pending Civil Applications stand disposed of. [R.M. BORDE, J.] snk/2011/AUG11/fast23439.10