1 F.A.st.38071.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD (1) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38071 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 1. Prakash Hanmant Kasale and others ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (2) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38077 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Manmath Dhondiraj Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (3) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38083 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Shivrudra Dhondiraj Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (4) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38094 OF 2010 2 F.A.st.38071.10 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Madhubala Mahadeo Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (5) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38081 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Nagnath Dhondiraj Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (6) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38079 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Mahadeo Dhondiraj Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (7) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38075 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Shivaji Gangaram Shingade ...RESPONDENT. WITH 3 F.A.st.38071.10 (8) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 37928 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 1. Shivaji Subhash Patil and another. ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (9) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38092 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 1. Rajpal Shankar Patil and others ...RESPONDENTS. WITH (10) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38087 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Ram Babarao Shingade ...RESPONDENT. WITH (11) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38085 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 4 F.A.st.38071.10 Nilkanth Dhondiraj Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (12) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38088 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Ushabai Manmath Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (13) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38090 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Sanjiv Shivprasad Mitkari ...RESPONDENT. WITH (14) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38060 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Shivaji Bapurao Kondamigre ...RESPONDENT. WITH (15) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38062 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 5 F.A.st.38071.10 Vijaykumar Haribhai Bondhankar Through GPA ...RESPONDENT. WITH (16) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38064 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Shantabai Sopan Kondamigre ...RESPONDENT. WITH (17) FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 38067 OF 2010 1. The State of Maharashtra and another ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS Sindubai Ram Shingade ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri.K.S.Patil, AGP for Applicant. ... CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 2ND AUGUST, 2011. PER COURT : 1. These appeals are presented by the Appellants-State raising exception to the Judgment and Award passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Ahmedpur, District Latur, on 23.02.2007, in group of Land Acquisition Reference bearing No. 67 of 2002 and other companion reference 6 F.A.st.38071.10 applications. 2. Agricultural lands belonging to different agriculturists/claimants- respondent herein came to be acquired for construction of Dhaswadi Medium Irrigation Project at village Navatwadi. Notification Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 28.03.1996 and after following procedure prescribed in the Land Acquisition Act, award came to be passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 13.08.1999. The Special Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation in respect of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs.250/- per R. 3. The claimants being dissatisfied with Judgment and Award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, tendered separate applications seeking reference of the matter to the Civil Court for determination of the market value of the acquired land. The claimants claimed enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre. 4. The claimants, in order to substantiate their contentions led oral evidence as well as placed reliance on the documentary evidence in the form of sale instances . Exhibits 26 to 28 have been proved by the claimants by examining the witnesses. The area to the extent of 67 R out of 7 F.A.st.38071.10 Survey No. 419 has been sold for consideration of Rs. 60,000/- on 17.08.1994 under sale instance placed on record and proved by claimant. The lands covered by sale instances are situate in the near vicinity of acquired land. The land covered by sale instances show that market value of the land at the relevant time was Rs.1000/- per R approximately. The Reference Court considering oral evidence, situation, quality and fertility of soil in respect of the acquired land so also on considering the documentary evidence in the form comparable sale instances, prescribed market value at the rate of Rs. 780/- per R. 5. I have perused the Judgment and Award of the Reference Court and heard argument advanced by Mr. Patil, learned AGP. I have also perused the relevant copies of evidence made available by the learned AGP, while arguing the matter. Considering all relevant circumstances, I am convinced that Reference Court has adopted reasonable approach in the matter and the enhancement in amount of compensation that has been granted is quite marginal. In this view of the matter, no interference is called for in these appeals. The appeals, being devoid of substance, stand dismissed. Sd/- [ R.M.BORDE, J. ] MTK 8 F.A.st.38071.10