{1} fast774311.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.7743 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra through District Collector, Latur and two others Appellants Versus Umakant s/o Sambhaji Umbarge Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.7769 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra through District Collector, Latur and two others Appellants Versus Vaijinath s/o Baswantrao Umbarge Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.7774 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra through District Collector, Latur and two others Appellants Versus Dhondiram s/o Malikarjun Dongare and another Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.7772 OF 2011 {2} fast774311.odt The State of Maharashtra through District Collector, Latur and two others Appellants Versus Shankar s/o Vishwanath Himpalnare Respondent Mr. K.S.Patill, A.G.P. for appellants. CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 03 rd August, 2011 PER COURT: 1 These are appeals presented by the State raising exception to the judgment and award dated 06.05.2009, passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nilanga, in L.A.R. No.31 of 2004 and other 3 Land Acquisition References. 2 The lands belonging to the Respondents – original claimants, comprising of small pieces, came to be acquired for construction of percolation tank at village Shirur-Anantpal, Taluka Shirur, District Latur. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 22.02.2001 and after following the procedure prescribed under Land Acquisition Act, award came to be passed on 30.03.2002. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs.560/- per are. 3 The claimants, being dissatisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, tendered separate applications, seeking {3} fast774311.odt reference of the matters to the Civil Court for determination of market price of the acquired lands. The claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. 4 In order to substantiate their claim, claimants have placed reliance on oral as well as documentary evidence. The documentary evidence consist of comparable sale instances in respect of agricultural lands situate in the near vicinity of the acquired lands. Sale instance, relied upon by the respondents, at Exhibit-41 is between one Nagnath and Ramesh in respect of land admeasuring 81 ares out of G.No. 13/13/A, which has been sold for consideration of Rs.60,000/-. Sale instance, relied upon by the respondents, at Exhibit-43 is in respect of land G.No.270/183/A and the land sold is to the extent of 29 ares for consideration of Rs.18,000/-. These sale instances are two years prior to issuance of Section 4 Notification in respect of acquired lands. The Reference Court, therefore, granted 10% increase per year in respect of the price and determined market value of dry crop land @ Rs.745/- per are. The value of seasonally irrigated land has been computed one and half times higher than the value prescribed for dry crop land. The Reference Court, by application of certain guesswork, determined value of the acquired property, i.e. seasonally irrigated land @ Rs.1117/- per are. 5 I have perused the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court and heard arguments advanced by learned Assistant Government Pleader. I have also gone through the evidence placed on record by claimants, copies of which were made available by learned A.G.P. for perusal. {4} fast774311.odt 6 Considering all relevant aspects, I am convinced that the view adopted by the Reference Court is reasonable and proper. The amount of compensation, directed to be paid by way of enhancement, is quite reasonable. The lands belonging to the claimants, taken in possession by the State, comprise of small pieces, thereby entitling the claimants to receive paltry sum. In my opinion, no interference is called for in these appeals. The appeals are devoid of substance. 7 Appeals, therefore, stand dismissed. Pending Civil Applications do not survive and stand disposed of. R.M.BORDE JUDGE adb/fast774311