1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14335/2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3649/2008(for delay condonation) WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3650/2008 (For stay) The State of Maharashtra. Versus Gajanan Pandurang Gandharkar and others. ***** FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14176/2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3639/2008 (for delay condonation) WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3640/2008 (for stay) The State of Maharashtra. -VERSUS- Gajanan Pandurang Gandharkar and others. ......... Ms.S.V.Manchekar, A.G.P., Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Vishal Khanavkar, Advocate for the respondents. .......... CORAM : A.P.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 12TH FEBRUARY, 2009. P.C. : 1. There is delay in filing of the appeal preferred by the State Government. Learned counsel for the respondents does not oppose 2 the prayer for condonation of delay. Hence, the applications for condonation of delay are allowed and disposed of. 2. The appeals are taken up for final hearing by the consent of the parties. The lands in both these appeals are situated in village Navde. Both the appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 3. Notification under Section 4 was published on 03.01.1970 and the award in respect of the suit property was passed on 29.08.1996. The possession of the land was taken on 10.10.1986. The agricultural lands are situated at a distance of less than 350 metres from the Bombay-Pune National Highway. 4. The above referred facts are undisputed and both the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties request the Court to proceed to dispose of the appeals on the above extracted factual matrix. 5. My attention is invited to the order passed by the Division Bench dated 30.08.2004 in First Appeal No.602/1991. So also the order passed by the another Division Bench dated 16.09.2004 in First Appeal No.423/1996. The lands in the said appeals were also acquired under the same notification. It is an admitted position that lands covered in these appeals are similarly situated with lands covered in the above referred disposed of appeals. 6. Placing reliance on the said two judgments, learned counsel for the respondents has contended that the Trial Court is very much justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs.25/- per square metre. 3 In the judgment passed in First Appeal No.757/2003 and First Appeal No.1782/2002 the market value of the land was fixed at Rs.25/- per square metre. The learned A.G.P. does not dispute that in all connected matters wherein the lands are acquired from the village Navde, the compensation has been fixed at Rs.25/- per square metre. 7. In this view of the matter, the Trial Court is justified in granting compensation at the rate of Rs.25/- per square metre. The reference award as such does not call for any interference. In the result, the appeals are dismissed with no orders as to cost. In view of the dismissal of the appeals, the stay applications are rendered infructuous and the same are disposed of. JUDGE