1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 178 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Latur Appellant V E R S U S Ramkishan s/o Vishwambar Ghyal, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, Resident of Talni, Taluka Ausa, District Latur Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 209 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Latur Appellant V E R S U S Bali s/o Dhondiba Lanjare, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, Resident of Talni, Taluka Ausa, District Latur. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 1524 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Latur Appellant V E R S U S Indrajit s/o Narsing Lanjare, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, Resident of Talni, Taluka Ausa, District Latur. Respondent 2 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 1523 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Latur Appellant V E R S U S Kisan s/o Limba Bhujbal, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, Resident of Talni, Taluka Ausa, District Latur. Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 1525 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Latur Appellant V E R S U S 1. Udaybhan s/o Malhari Ghayal, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, 2. Vasant s/o Malhari Ghayal, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, 3. Venkat s/o Narhari Ghayal, Aged Major, Occupation Agriculture, All resident of Talni, Taluka Ausa, District Latur Respondents Mr. S.N. Kendre, AGP for the appellant / State Respondents though served, absent CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 15th July, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. All these appeals can be decided at this admission stage by this common Judgment, because they all arose from one Notification 3 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is common ground that the lands of all the respondents / claimants were acquired in the year 1987 for the purpose of percolation tank at village Talni, Taluka Ausa, District Latur. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ Rs.130/- to Rs.150/- per Are / Guntha. The respondents / claimants challenged the Award by way of references before the Civil Court. They claimed that the prevailing market value of the lands in question was more than Rs.40,000/- per acre, and so, they demanded enhanced compensation. The appellant / State of Maharashtra opposed the references. However, the learned Judge of the reference Court having regard to the evidence led by the respondents / claimants, held that they were entitled to compensation @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. He also held that all the lands in question were Jirayat / dry lands. 2. In view of the challenge to this finding, the only question that arises for my consideration in these appeals is, whether appellant could prove that the prevailing market value of the lands in question was less than Rs.20,000/- per acre. At the outset, it must be mentioned that the appellant / State of Maharashtra did not lead any evidence when the case was tried before the reference Court. On the other hand, the respondents / claimants examined witness to prove the sale instance of adjoining village and established that the prevailing market value of the lands of village Mangrul, the adjoining village, was more than Rs.20,000/- per acre in 1982. On the other hand, they showed that the Notification for acquisition of these lands was issued on 3rd November, 1988. Having regard to the escalation in market price of the lands, the learned Judge of the reference Court held that the market value of the lands in question would not be less than Rs.33,000/- per acre in 1988. The learned Judge of the reference Court also took into consideration the evidence of the claimants when they asserted that they were utilizing 4 their lands for taking two crops in a year. Despite of this, the learned Judge of the reference Court mainly placed reliance on the Judgment of Land Acquisition References (group), in which the Civil Court had granted compensation @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. The learned Judge of the reference Court observed that the lands in that case were acquired for the same purpose and at the same time. Having regard to this and despite the evidence that has come on record indicate that the market value of the lands in question was not less than Rs. 33,000/- per acre. The learned Judge of the reference Court moderated it and awarded compensation @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. As said above, it was necessary for the appellant / State of Maharashtra to adduce evidence and to prove that the market value of the lands in question at the relevant time was less than Rs.20,000/- per acre. Having failed to do so, the appellants cannot assail the impugned Judgment. The appeals should therefore fail. The appeals stand dismissed. (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) srm/fa/178/10