1 FA 1933.2010 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 1933 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's Orders Mr. V.D.Godbharle, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for State Mr. B.L.Dhas, Advocate for Resp. No. 1 & 2. Mr. P.P.Dama, Advocate for Resp. No. 4. .................................... CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 04/02/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The State has filed the present Appeal against the Judgment and Award passed by the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act [ For short, ‘ the Act ’ ]. 3. The land of the present respondent came to be acquired. The Special Land Acquisition Officer [ For short, ‘ the Officer ’ ] awarded compensation of Rs. 6,615/-. Being dis- satisfied by the said amount awarded by the Officer, the claimants preferred Reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference 2 FA 1933.2010 Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 24,975/-. The State being aggrieved by the same, has filed the present First Appeal. 4. Mr. Godbharle, learned Assistant Govt. pleader submits that the Reference Court has granted exorbitant amount. The sale instances which have been relied upon, are not of similarly situated land. There is no evidence forthwith coming in this regard. The learned Assistant Govt. Pleader also contends that there is no evidence to show that the lands were seasonally irrigated. According to him, the Officer has considered all the sale instances and awarded reasonable amount of compensation. 5. With the assistance of the learned Assistant Govt. Pleader, I have gone through the Judgment of the Reference Court. The Reference Court has considered the Sale deeds at Exhs. 21 and 22. The said lands are situated at about 1000 Ft. from the acquired lands. The oral evidence has also been appreciated by the Reference Court and thereby has come to the conclusion that the lands were seasonally irrigated. It is a matter of record that the claimants had harvested the crops like Sugarcane and Banana in the said land. In 3 FA 1933.2010 light of the same, the Reference Court has not committed any error in treating the said lands as seasonally irrigated one, so also, the sale deeds vide Exh. 21 and 22 are properly considered. The amount awarded is not exorbitant but the Reference Court has awarded modest amount. 6. In light of the above, the First Appeal being sans merit, is dismissed however with no order as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] knp/FA 1933.2010