( 1 ) fast18080.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18080 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Yogaji Govind Kardile (died - L.R.) .. Respondent Limbaraj alias Limbaji s/o. Yogaji Kardile WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18308 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant Versus Tukaram Rama Sangale & Ors. .. Respondents Shri K.S. Patil, A.G.P. for appellant/State. CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATED : 22.07.2011 P.C. :- 1. These are appeals presented by the State Government raising exception to the judgment and award passed in L.A.R. ( 2 ) fast18080.09 Nos. 386 and 388 of 1999, by the I Adhoc Additional District Judge, Beed, dated 30.09.2005. 2. The agricultural lands belonging to the claimants admeasuring 3 H 55 R and 22 R respectively came to be acquired. The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 15.08.1996. After following the procedure prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act, the award came to be passed on 29.04.1998. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation of Rs. 250/- per R. 3. The claimants being dissatisfied with the award, tendered separate application seeking reference of the matters to the Civil Court for determination of the market value of the acquired lands. The claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per R. In order to substantiate their claim, the claimants have placed reliance on the sale instances and also have led oral evidence. Sale- deed at Exh. 23 is in respect of sale of 2 H 03 R land sold for consideration of Rs. 1,53,000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs. 800/- per R. Second sale instance is in respect of 1 H 39 R ( 3 ) fast18080.09 sold for Rs. 1,60,000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs. 1145/- per R. Third sale instance is in respect of irrigated land admeasuring 40 R, which has been sold for consideration of Rs. 44,000/- i.e. approximately at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per R. The claimants have also placed reliance in the judgment in L.A.R. No. 385 of 1999. The land involved in the said reference application was acquired for construction of percolation tank at same village. The date of acquisition in present matters also coincides the date of acquisition in the said matter. The Reference Court found the judgment and finding arrived at therein relevant for determination of the compensation. In the instant matter the Reference Court followed the view taken by the Court while disposing of L.A.R. No. 385 of 1999. The Reference Court prescribed the value of the agricultural land in the instant matter at Rs. 625/- per R. 4. Considering the totality of the circumstances, I am of the view that very reasonable approach has been adopted by the Reference Court. The amount of compensation offered by the Reference Court is quite moderate and that too is based ( 4 ) fast18080.09 on evidence placed on record by the claimants. No interference is called for in these appeals. The appeals are dismissed. [R.M. BORDE, J.] snk/2011/JUL11/fast18080.09