( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 2576 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Appellants Versus Trimbak s/o. Hariji Dolzake .. Respondent Smt. Yogita Kshirsagar, A.G.P. for the appellants. Shri S.B. Joshi, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. DATED : 26.11.2010 P.C. :- 1. Present respondent had filed Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the S.L.A.O. The S.L.A.O. had awarded compensation of Rs. 63,425/- to the claimant. The Reference Court had enhanced it to Rs. 93,712/-. Said award is assailed in the present First Appeal. 2. Learned A.G.P. for the state submits that the ( 2 ) Reference Court has without any evidence on record enhanced the amount of compensation. The Reference Court had accepted that the certified copy of the sale-deed at Exh. 16 cannot be relied upon. Still the Reference Court has granted enhancement in the compensation amount. 3. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the State had entered into compromise with other claimants in respect of the land which were acquired for the said project and from the same village. Said lands were also acquired under the same notification. The Reference Court was justified in granting same amount of compensation which was granted to the landholders in which the State had entered into compromise. 4. With the assistance of learned Counsels I have gone through the judgment in L.A.R. Nos. 401 of 1998, 408 of 1998 and 358 of 1998. The State had entered into compromise with the claimants before the Lok-adalat and had paid them 1½ times amount of compensation awarded by the S.L.A.O. There is nothing on record to show that the lands which were acquired under the said Reference were different. When the ( 3 ) lands are acquired for the same project and the lands were also situated in the same village, then those lands will have to be taken as one Unit. In absence of any material that the lands under those Reference were of superior quality, the same amount of compensation will have to be awarded. In light of the above, the Reference Court has not committed any error in awarding claimant in the present Reference, the same amount of compensation as awarded in the References referred supra. 5. The First Appeal, as such, is dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.] snk/2010/NOV10/fa2576.10