( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 62 OF 1994 Maroti s/o Ganpat Waikule, R/o Borja, Tal. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani APPELLANT VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Parbhani. 2. The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, Upper Penganga Project, Kalamnuri, M.K.V., Parbhani. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 412 OF 1994 Govindrao s/o Yeshwantrao Maske, R/o Borja, Tal. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Parbhani. 2. The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, Upper Penganga Project, Kalamnuri, M.K.V., Parbhani. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 413 OF 1994 Dhondbarao s/o Dadarao Maske, ( 2 ) R/o Borja, Tal. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Collector, Parbhani. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, M.K.V. Parbhani. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 376 OF 1994 Ganpati s/o Bhagwan Since deceased, by L.Rs. 1. Maroti s/o Ganpati Waikule, R/o Borja, Tal. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani. 2. Ramrao s/o Ganpati Waikule, R/o as above. 3. Laxmanrao Ganpati Waikule, R/o as above. APPELLANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Parbhani. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Kalamnuri M.K.V., Parbhani. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 319 OF 1993 1. Bapurao s/o Dattarao Maske, R/o Borja, Tq. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani. 2. Deorao s/o Dattarao Maske, R/o Borja, Tq. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani. APPELLANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, ( 3 ) through Collector, Parbhani. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Purna Project, Kalamnuri, M.K.V. Parbhani. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 586 OF 1993 1. Sheshrao Nagorao, R/o Borja, Tal. Kalamnuri, District Parbhani. 2. Kondbarao Yeshwantrao, R/o as above. 3. Rustum s/o Sheshrao, R/o as above. APPELLANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Parbhani. 2. The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, Purna Project, Kalamnuri. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.V. Warad, advocate for the appellants in all the appeals. Mr. S.D. Kaldate, A.G.P. for the respondents in all the appeals. ..... [CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.] [DATE : 18th March, 2010] ORAL JUDGEMENT : 1. Heard Mr. S.V. Warad, learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.P. ( 4 ) 2. In a group of matters, the appeals are admitted on 24th February, 1994. Since they are arising out of same village and project, namely, “Upper Penganga Project”, the appeals are finally disposed of. 3. The agricultural field of the respective claimants was subject of acquisition. The claimants did not accept the award passed by the Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, Purna Project, Kalamnuri, dated 31st March, 1979. Resultantly, four separate Land Acquisition References (LARs) being LAR No. 123/91, LAR No. 124/91, LAR NO. 125/91 and LAR No. 182/91 for the different survey numbers and different areas, were moved to the Collector, seeking objection for the award and for enhancement. These References are subject of challenge in the group of appeals. 4. The notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was dated 6th March, 1974 published in Government Gazette on 4th April, 1974. The declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was dated 22nd September, 1974 published in the Government Gazette ( 5 ) on 30th October, 1975. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has, by the award, granted an amount of Rs. 17, 625/- to the claimant in LAR No. 123/91, amount of Rs. 17,625/- in LAR No. 124/91, amount of Rs. 32,059/- in LAR No. 125/91 and an amount of Rs. 38,489/- in LAR No. 182/91. As stated earlier, this amount was received under protest and Land Acquisition References under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act were submitted in time. 5. Based on the pleadings, the learned Reference Court formulated issues as under : (1) Does petitioner prove that the compensation awarded to him under the award was inadequate and did not reflect market price at the relevant time ? (2) Whether he is entitled to enhanced compensation in terms of his prayer ? (3) Whether claim is time barred ? (4) Whether claimant is entitled to solatium and interest as per request ? (5) What order or award ? ( 6 ) He recorded his findings against them as under : (1) In the affirmative. (2) Yes, at the rate of Rs. 6000/- per Acre. (3) In the negative. (4) Yes, as per final order. (5) As per final order. and held entitlement of the individual claimant to Rs. 6000/- per Acre as additional compensation of the price for the properties acquired. The lands which were acquired by the Government were of village Borja, Taluka Kalamnuri, as stated above, for submergence of Upper Penganga Project, Kalamnuri. Before the learned Reference Court, certified copies of registered sale- deeds were tendered at Exh-14 and Exh-18 in LAR No. 123/91 and the group of matters. The sale-deeds considered were of later time, which were dated 22nd June, 1981. While the notification under section 4 is dated 6th March, 1974, the declaration under section 6 is dated 30th October, 1975. It is thus revealed, the sale instances are virtually after six years of the ( 7 ) notification. The consideration of the evidence made the learned Judge to draw additional price of land to grant compensation. The evidence of sale instances showed that the market price at the time of acquisition was less than Rs. 10,000/- per Acre, while the petitioners therein had claimed compensation of Rs. 11,000/- to Rs. 15,000/- per Acre. 6. Mr. Warad has placed before me judgement of this Court in first appeal No. 168/1993 (Gitabai Shripat Jadhav vs. The State of Maharashtra and another), dated 22nd January, 2009 and also judgement in first appeal No. 320/1993 (Bhagwanrao Ramrao Maske v. The State of Maharashtra and another), dated 4th November, 2009. These two judgements, relate to the village Borja under Kalamnuri Tahsil. The lands were acquired for purpose of Upper Penganga Project. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at rate of Rs. 3000/- per Acre and Rs. 2400/- per Acre. In first appeal No. 168/1993, considering the position, the appeal was allowed and the orders in Land Acquisition References were modified making it at rate of Rs. 9000/- per Acre for the land ( 8 ) acquired and rest of the award was left unaltered. In first appeal No. 320/1993, the directions were similarly made making the appellant entitled to receive compensation at rate of Rs. 9000/- per Acre alongwith other incidental benefits. 7. In the light of these two judgements of this Court, no other view in the present case could be possible to be taken. This is because, these are the group of matters arising out of same project and same village. The learned A.G.P. accepts this position. Hence order. The appeal is partly allowed. The appellant/s in each of the first appeal is held to be entitled to a price of Rs. 9000/- per Acre alongwith other incidental benefits. The other award and statutory benefits shall remain unaltered. No costs. The appeals allowed in above terms. [ K.U. CHANDIWAL ] JUDGE NPJ/fa62-94 ( 9 )