fast9372.98 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 9372 OF 1998 The State of Maharashtra & another .. APPELLANTS VERSUS Udesing Bhika Patil & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP for the State ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 5 th JULY, 2011. PER COURT : 1 This is an appeal raising exception to the judgment and award passed by the Civil Judge, Sr.Dn., Amalner in LAR no. 278/1993 decided on 28-2-1997. 2 Agricultural lands belonging to the claimants came to be acquired for the purpose of construction of Hatnoor Canal, Left Kurel Distributory minor No. 6. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be passed on 18-12-1990. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at fast9372.98 2 the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per Hector. Claimants, being dis-satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, tendered application seeking reference of the matter to the civil court for determination of market value. Reference court, on consideration of the evidence placed on record by the claimants, came to the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land shall be Rs. 1,332/- per R. 3 Claimants, in order to substantiate their claim, placed reliance on the evidence in the form of comparable sale instance. Exh. 24 is the sale instance dated 11-3-1985 in respect of alienation of 60 R land by one Baburao for consideration of Rs. 40,000/-. The sale instance is proved by one Atmaram who is acquainted with the transaction as the vendor Baburao is no more. Land covered by the sale instance is Jirayat land. Considering the fact that the land acquired belonging to the claimants being agricultural lands, reference court prescribed value of the land at Rs. 1332/- per R. Reference court has taken into consideration all the relevant aspects and granted moderate enhancement in the amount of compensation receivable by the claimants. On perusal of the judgment and award passed by the reference court and on consideration of the copies of oral and documentary evidence made available for perusal of learned AGP while fast9372.98 3 arguing the appeal, I do not deem it appropriate to cause interference in the appeal. Appeal is devoid of substance hence stands dismissed. 4 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE dyb