( 1 ) fast20085.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 20085 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Aminabi Chandsaheb Jamdar (died) .. Respondent L.R. - Mashaq Abdul Jamadar WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24532 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Chandulal Bansilal Bedmutha .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24596 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Devendra s/o. Sadashiv Kantekure .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24585 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant ( 2 ) fast20085.09 Versus Mallinath Babanna Patil & Anr. .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24588 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Rajendra Vasantrao Kulkarni .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24593 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Kamlakar Raghunathrao Kulkarni .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24480 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Shrikant Vasudeorao Joshi .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 20075 OF 2009 ( 3 ) fast20085.09 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Bharatbai w/o. Dattoba Chavan .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17961 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Mahaveer s/o. Baliram Ambar (died) .. Respondent his L.R. - Smt. Mandodari Mahaveer Ambar & ors. WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17965 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Mallappa Kallappa Rasure .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17978 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Ravindra Madhavrao Ambar .. Respondent ( 4 ) fast20085.09 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17971 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Chintan w/o. Babruwan Bhojane .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17968 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Vidyasagar Raghuram Ambar .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17981 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Chandrakant Raghuram Ambar (died) .. Respondent L.R. - Mankarnika Chandrakant Ambar & ors. WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24563 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Gunwant Anandrao Mule .. Respondent ( 5 ) fast20085.09 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24512 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Anandrao Annappa Mule .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24566 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Suresh Digambarrao Potdar .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 24670 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Shrimant Hiranna Mule .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 20302 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Ratnabai w/o. Parmeshwar Bhosage .. Respondent ( 6 ) fast20085.09 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 20359 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Gopinath Ambaji Pawar .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 13740 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Sonabai w/o. Annappa Jeveri (Sontakke) .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 13727 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Noorsab Saifan Nurse .. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 13743 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Khajabee w/o. Dawal Sayyad .. Respondent ( 7 ) fast20085.09 Shri K.S. Patil, Shri T.S. Lodhe & Shri S.N. Kendre, A.G.Ps. for the appellant/State in the respective matters. CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATED : 08.07.2011 P.C. :- 1. These are appeals presented by the State raising exception to the judgment and award passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad, in Land Acquisition Reference No. 209 of 2005 and other companion Reference Applications decided on 29.04.2008 and other different dates. 2. The agricultural land in respect of the claimants came to be acquired for construction of Benitura Medium Project. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 21.04.1988 and after following the procedure prescribed in the Land Acquisition Act, award came to be passed on 21.11.1992. The land acquisition officer offered amount of compensation in respect of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per hectare i.e. Rs. 4800/- ( 8 ) fast20085.09 per acre. The claimants being dissatisfied with the judgment and award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, tendered applications seeking reference of the matter to the Civil Court for determination of the market value of the acquired land. The claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,60,000/- per hectare with statutory benefits. The claimants claimed compensation of Rs. 40,000/- per acre. 3. In order to substantiate their claim, the claimants placed reliance on the oral evidence of the respective claimants as well as one witness Arvind Kashinath Ambar at Exh. 30 to prove sale instance placed on record. One Arvind Amber – claimant’s witness claims to have purchased 1 hectare 23 R land out of Survey No. 396/1, situated at Murum from one Damayantibai Phule on 19.03.1994 for consideration of Rs. 2,25,000/-. It is stated by the witness that there was ban in respect of execution of sale-deed, as such, although agreement was entered into in 1985 and amount was paid to the land owner, only agreement to sell was executed on 26.04.1985 and sale-deed was got executed in the year 1994. It is, thus, contended that the transaction is, in-fact, of the year 1985. ( 9 ) fast20085.09 However, sale-deed is executed in the year 1994. It is stated by the witness that the distance between the land covered by the sale deed and the acquired land is 1 km. The witness has also deposed about quality and fertility of the acquired land and stated that the land purchased by him is of similar quality as that of land acquired by the State. The claimants also placed reliance on the judgment in the Reference Application bearing Nos. 380/04, 471/04, 468/04, 151/04,137/05 and 398/04. In similar circumstances and in respect of land situated in nearby vicinity, the Reference Court awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.36,000/-per acre 4. The Reference Court on consideration of oral as well as documentary evidence placed on record by the claimants came to the conclusion that the market price of the acquired land shall be Rs. 14,000/- per acre. The sale instance placed on record by the claimant is in respect of the land having irrigation facility of well. Considering the distance between the acquired land and the land covered by sale instance is having irrigation facility, the Reference Court has scaled down the compensation in respect of acquired ( 10 ) fast20085.09 land by more than 50%. 5. With the assistance of learned A.G.P appearing for the State, I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court and have also examined the documentary as well as oral evidence, copies of which were made available by learned A.G.P. 6. Considering all relevant circumstances, I am of the view that the Reference Court has adopted reasonable approach in the matter. The amount directed to be paid to the claimant by way of enhanced compensation is quite moderate. In this view of the matter, no interference is called for. The appeals, being devoid of merit, stand dismissed. [R.M. BORDE, J.] snk/2011/JUL11/fast20085.09