fast16024.10 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 16024 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9796 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and others ...Appellants Versus Laxmibai w/o Bhanudas Deokate and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. S.N. Kendre, AGP, for the appellants ..... CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. DATED: 18TH JULY, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 This is an appeal presented by the State raising exception to the judgment and award passed by the learned IInd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga, on 30.4.2009 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 440 of 2003. 2 The agricultural lands belonging to the claimants situate at Osmanabad has been taken in possession for public purpose. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 22.9.1994 and after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, an award came to be passed on 14.2.1997 and the claimants were directed to receive the amount of compensation by issuing notice under Section fast16024.10 -2- 12(2) of the Act on 29.9.1997. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ ` 56,500/- per hectare for acquired lands. 3 The claimants being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, offered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer tendered application seeking reference of the matter to the Civil Court for determination of proper market value of the acquired land. The claimants claimed compensation @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre. The claimants, in order to substantiate their claims, have placed reliance on the evidence in the form of comparable sale instances, apart from leading oral evidence. P.W.2 Yogesh Bora has deposed that he and his brother Ashok have purchased land bearing S. No.106 admeasuring 40 R for a consideration of ` 91,000/- from one Annasaheb Nimbalkar. It is observed that this land purchased by Yogesh Bora situates towards western side of the land owned by him. The contention before the Reference Court was that the purchasers might have paid higher price of the land involved in the sale instance and therefore, the said sale instance does not depict the prevailing market price. The Reference court has taken into consideration this aspect and has reached to the conclusion that even if it is assumed that the purchaser i.e. P.W.2 has paid inflated price after granting allowance of about 50% and after scaling down price suitably, the market price in the vicinity of the acquired land shall not be less than ` 50,000/- per acre. It is also observed by the Land Acquisition Officer that the acquired land is situate in the outskirts of Osmanabad town and fast16024.10 -3- portion of Barshi-Bidar State Highway passes through the part of the agricultural lands owned by the claimants. On consideration of situation of the land as well as the proximity to the urban area, the Reference Court prescribed the market value of the acquired land at ` 50,000/- per acre and directed the State to pay the enhanced compensation accordingly. 4 After going through the judgment and award passed by the Reference court and that on consideration of relevant record including the copies of depositions and the copy of sale instance referred to by the learned AGP appearing for the appellants while arguing the matter, I am convinced that the appeal presented by the State does not deserve consideration. The appeal is devoid of substance and the same stands dismissed. 5 In view of dismissal of first appeal, pending civil application No. 9796 of 2010, seeking stay to the impugned judgment and award, does not survive for further consideration and the same stands disposed of accordingly. ( R.M. BORDE. J.) rlj/