FA/2947/2018 of THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KUKADI LEFT BANK CANAL SUB DIVISION, KOLWADI Vs THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

928.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 928 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2937 OF 2018 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8435 OF 2025 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2930 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2931 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2933 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant 1 2026:BHC-AUG:29317 928.odt VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2934 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2936 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2938 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2939 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant 2 928.odt VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2940 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2941 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2942 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2943 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant 3 928.odt VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2944 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2945 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2946 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents …. WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2947 OF 2018 The Executive Engineer, Kukadi Left Bank Canal, Sub-Division, Kolwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. … Appellant 4 928.odt VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents ….. Mr. Gulab B. Rajale, Advocate for Appellant – Acquiring Body Mr. N. D. Raje, AGP for Respondent No.1 – State Mr. D. R. Jayabhar, Advocate for the respective Respondents / Claimants ….. CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. DATE : 17.07.2026 FINAL ORDER : 1. These are the Appeals preferred by the Acquiring Body against the common Judgment and Award dated 04.09.2010, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Shrigonda , in group of eighteen (18) Land Acquisition References (LAR), which were filed by the Respondents – Claimants for enhanced compensation towards the acquisition of their lands for ‘ Kukadi Canal’, from Village – Wadgaon Tanpura, Taluka – Karjat, District – Ahmednagar. 2. Heard finally by consent of both the sides. 3. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Acquiring Body that, the Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short ‘t he SLAO’) awarded the compensation ranging from Rs.240/- to Rs.300/- per R. for dry land, and the learned Reference Court enhanced the rate to Rs.1,250/- per R. for dry land. He fairly submits that, the enhancement is little over four (04) tim es of the compensation awarded by the SLAO. He submits that, the lear ned 5 928.odt Reference Court has granted interest from the date of taking possession of the land, which is contrary to the decision of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari; 2016 (4) ALL MR 513 and the Award be accordingly modified and the Appeal be disposed off. 4. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Claimant/s that, several matters arising out of the same acquisition proceedings were disposed off before the Lok-Adalat by way of amicable settlement. He submits that, the learned Reference Court has properly enhanced the compensation and no interference was called for. However, he does not dispute that the interes t shall be calculated from the date of the final Award, as per the abo ve- referred decision. 5. The Judgment passed by the learned Reference Court shows that, the said rate is determined on the basis of the Award dated 08.08.2010 in LAR No.603/2003 and LAR No.607/2003 before the National Lok-Adalat. The observations from the Judgment are reproduced below : “9) The contentions of the Reference Petitions are on ly considered with regard to value of the land. With r egards to the value of the land, Reference Petitioner in his petiti on submitted that there was compromise in L.R.A.No.603/2003 to 6 07/2003 and 2/2004 to 6/2004. The compromise was before the 'Lokadalat' held on 8/08/2010. In 'Lokadalat' market v alue is determined at the rate of Rs.1250/- per R. It is swore by witness Bapu Dinkar Shinde that the land of which value is determined in 'Loknyayalaya' on 8/08/2010 and land which is su bject matter of present petition are out of one and the sam e village and out of one and same project i.e. purpose of the acquisition is one and the same project. Therefore, present Referen ce Petitioners have admitted and accepted the value determined in L.R.A.No.603/2003 to 607/2003 in 'Loknyayalaya’ hel d on 6 928.odt 8/08/2010 at the rate of Rs.1250/- per R. Petitioners accepted the same valuation though at the time of notification un der section 4 the value exceeds Rs.1400/- per R. It is f urther contended by the Petitioner, witness, the crop pattern, fertility of the land of which valuation is determined in 'Loknya yalaya' is one and the same, as compared to land which is subj ect matter of the present Reference Petition. As Petitioner accepted the value determined in L.R.A.No.424/2003, copy of Judgment, wh ich is at Exh.12, in' Loknyayalaya' the value of the land is determined, considering the said Judgment i.e. Exh.12 with rise in price. 10) Considering all these facts and evidence on reco rd, I am of the view that the value determined by Land Acquisition Officer is not as per the market value as on the day of notific ation and it needs to enhance. Therefore, considering the evidence, I hold that value of the land is at the rate of Rs.1250/- per R instead of value determined by the Land Acquisition Officer.” 6. From the above observations, it is clear that, on the basis of the connected land references arising out of the same acquisi tion proceedings and the same Award, the rate was settled before the Lok-Adalat. The references, which are the subject matter of t hese Appeal, arise out of the same acquisition proceedings and the same Award. Hence, no fault can be found with the said enhanced rate determined by the learned Reference Court. The operative ord er of the impugned Judgment goes to show that, the interest is granted from the date of possession, which is contrary to the decision of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari; 2016 (4) ALL MR 513 and the Award needs to be modified accordingly. Hence, the following order is passed : ORDER [a] The Appeals are partly allowed to the extent of the interest only. [b] The interest shall be calculated from the date of final Award in light of the decision of this Court in State 7 928.odt of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari; 2016 (4) ALL MR 513. [c] The amount of enhanced compensation be accordingly calculated, and the excess amount, if any, deposited by the Acquiring Body be refunded to the Acquiring Body. [d] The Claimant/s shall be entitled to withdraw the amount after the calculation is made as above. [e] Pending Civil Application/s, if any, stand disposed off accordingly. [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] Sameer/July-2026 8