fast25582.09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 25582 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer Sub-Divisional Office, Masalga Medium Project .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & othes .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 25555 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 22906 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another .. RESPONDENTS fast25582.09 2 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 22899 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 22896 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 22893 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another .. RESPONDENTS fast25582.09 3 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 22338 OF 2009 The Executive Engineer .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.S. thombre, advocate for the appellant. Mr. S.N. Kendre, AGP for the State. ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 5 th JULY, 2011. PER COURT : 1 These are the appeals presented by the acquiring body raising exception to the judgment and award passed in LAR No. 497/1998 and other companion matters decided by the District Judge -1, Nilanga on 9-2-2007. 2 Agricultural lands belonging to the respondents / original claimants came to be acquired for construction of Masalga Medium Project. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 4-8-1984 and, after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, award came to be passed. The Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation in fast25582.09 4 respect of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 240/- and Rs. 260/- per R. Claimants, being dis-satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, tendered separate applications seeking reference of the matter to the civil court for determination of market value of the lands acquired. Claimants claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per acre. On consideration of the evidence placed on record and after hearing the parties, reference court arrived at finding that the market price of the acquired lands shall be Rs. 550/- per R and accordingly, directed payment of enhanced amount of compensation to the claimants. 3 In order to substantiate their claim, claimants have placed reliance on evidence in the form of comparable sale instances. Claimants have also lead oral evidence to prove their contentions as regards quality and fertility of the acquired lands. Claimants placed reliance on sale instance at exh. 19 dated 5-4-1978. One Devidas purchased land to the extent of 1 H and 8 gunthas from one Maruti for consideration of Rs. 30,000/-. CW 1 Bhimrao has deposed about the quality and fertility of the acquired lands which according to him is similar in all respects with the lands covered by the sale intstances. Village Tupadi is adjacent to village Shivani Kotal and the distance between the lands covered by the sale instance and the lands fast25582.09 5 acquired in the instant appeals is about 2 kms. Considering the evidence in the form of comparable sale instances and on consideration of the oral evidence, reference court arrived at conclusion that the market value of the acquired lands would be Rs. 550/- per R. It is also to be taken note of that the sale instance placed on record is of the year 1978 whereas notification under section 4 of the Act in the instant matters has been issued in the year 1984. Considering the reasonable rise in the prices of agricultural lands, determination of compensation at the rate of Rs. 550/- per R on the basis of sale instance, cannot be said to be exorbitant. However, determination of compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer is on the lower side. For the reasons recorded above and on consideration of the fact that the claimants have been held entitled to receive meager amount of compensation, I do not deem it appropriate to cause interference in the appeals. Appeals are devoid of substance hence stand dismissed. 4 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE dyb