1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 2868 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant Versus Ratnabai Dhulappa Nigudge and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. D.R. Korde, advocate for the appellant ..... CORAM: R.G. KETKAR, J. DATED: 16TH NOVEMBER, 2009 PER COURT:- 1 Heard Shri Korde, learned A.G.P. for the appellant. The appellant acquired the land of the respondents admeasuring 45 Are from survey No.181 situate in village Nhatangali, Tq. Omerga, District Osmanabad. The land was acquired for Lower Terna project, under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the said Act"). A notification under Section 4, was published on 17.12.1987 and the acquiring body took possession of the suit land in the month of March, 1984. The award was made on 31.3.1989 and the S.L.A.O. awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.5850/-. 2 2 Being aggrieved of the inadequate compensation, the respondents preferred reference under Section 18 of the said Act. Learned C.J.S.D. Osmanabad, enhanced the compensation from Rs.5850/- to Rs.18,000/-. Appeal is admitted and by consent of the parties taken up for final hearing forthwith. 3 With the assistance of the learned counsel, I was taken through the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned trial Judge. Perusal of the impugned order, indicates that the respondents claimants relied upon three sale instances. First at Exh.53 dated 17.12.1987, by which, a land admeasuring 2 Hectare 74 Are was sold for Rs.1.00,000/-. Considering the said sale instance, the rate comes to Rs.14,548/- per acre. Learned trial Judge considered other sale instances at Exh.54 and 55 and came to the conclusion that the compared to these sale instances, the sale instance at Exh.53, is comparable sale instance for determining the market price of the land under acquisition. After considering this sale instance at Exh.53, learned Trial Judge awarded compensation of Rs.18,000/- on account of acquisition of 45 Are of land as against the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer @ Rs.5850/-. Eventually, the learned trial Judge awarded compensation of Rs.18,000/-. In my opinion, the learned trial Judge has not committed any error by enhancing the Rs. 12,000/-. Considering the quantum involved in the present appeal, as 3 also on merits, I do not find any error committed by the learned trial Judge. I am of the opinion that the appeal is devoid of any substance and deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) rlj/