fast18816.09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18816 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. APPELLANT VERSUS Sahebrao Nathuji Darekar & others .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18814 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. APPELLANT VERSUS Bajirao Peeraji Nikam .. RESPONDENT WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18811 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. APPELLANT VERSUS Mankhabai w/o Khandu Berad .. RESPONDENT fast18816.09 2 WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18747 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. APPELLANT VERSUS Babasaheb s/o Premraj Amte .. RESPONDENT Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP for the State. ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 28 th JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : 1 These are the appeals presented by the State raising challenge to the judgment and award passed by the 1 st Ad-hoc Additional District Judge, Beed in LAR No. 378/1999 and other companion matters decided on 09-08-2005. 2 Agricultural lands belonging to the claimants came to be acquired for construction of village tank. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 24-9-1996 and, after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, award came to be published on 28-12-1998. The fast18816.09 3 Special Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 95/- and Rs. 100/- per R in respect of the acquired lands. Claimants, being dis- satisfied with the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, tendered separate applications seeking reference of the matter to the civil court for determination of market value of the acquired lands. Claimants claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per R. 3 Claimants, in order to substantiate their claim, placed reliance on evidence in the form of comparable sale instances. Witness no. 2 Bhausaheb Jagdhane has been examined to prove the sale instances at exh. 27 and 26. Bhausaheb purchased an area to the extent of 40 R out of survey no. 218 for consideration of Rs. 50,000/- in the year 1991. Witness deposed that the quality and fertility of the land is similar to the lands under acquisition and the lands covered under the sale instances situate at about 2 to 2.5 kms. away from the acquired lands. Claimants also relied upon sale instance at exh. 25 which pertains to the year 1992. An area to the extent of 18 R came to be sold for consideration of Rs. 17,000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs. 945/- per R. Considering the evidence in the form of comparable sale instances, reference court prescribed market value of the acquired land at Rs. 600/- per R and directed payment of enhanced amount of fast18816.09 4 compensation alongwith statutory benefits. 4 I have perused the judgment and award passed by the reference court so also examined the record made available during the course of hearing of the appeal. Considering the marginal enhancement directed by the reference court, and considering the fact that very small pieces of agricultural lands came to be acquired for the project, I do not deem it appropriate to cause interference in the appeals. Appeals are devoid of substance hence stand dismissed. 5 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE dyb