FA/1939/2021 of RAMESHWAR SUDAM U/G OF MOTHER GODAWARI SUDAM MIRGE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

1 919-FA.1933-21 & ors (919 to 922).odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 1933 OF 2021 PARAMESHWAR SUDAM MIRGE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1935 OF 2021 SHESHRAO VAMANRAO GIRAM VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1939 OF 2021 RAMESHWAR SUDAM U/G OF MOTHER GODAWARI SUDAM MIRGE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1958 OF 2021 NATHA VITTAL GORE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Advocate for Appellants in all : Mr. Kakade Deepak M. AGPs for Respondent/s-State : Mr. S. V. Hange, Mr. S. N. Morampalle, Mr. N. D. Raje, respectively Advocate for Respondent No.3 in all : Mr. S. C. Arora. ... CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 08.01.2026 FINAL ORDER :- 1. Heard both sides finally at the admission stage. 1/4 2026:BHC-AUG:974 2 919-FA.1933-21 & ors (919 to 922).odt 2. Appellants are taking exception to the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court granting enhancement to Rs.2500/- per R. for d ry land and Rs.1,250/- for Pot Kharab land, but omitting to grant benef it of escalation. They are relying on consistent view taken by this Court in various matters. One such order dated 23.12.2025 passed in First Appeal No.19 56 of 2021 has been placed on record. Appellants’ claim is contested by the respondents. They would submit that Reference Court has already enhanced the rate and no case is made out for granting benefit of escalation. 3. It is submission of the appellants that in First Appeal No.1 935 of 2021 there is a well in the land still it is treated to be dry land. 4. Following are the material particulars in the present appeals : Sr. No. First Appeal No. L.A.R. No. Gut No. Total area U/sec.4 notification date U/sec.11 Award date SLAO rate per R as per Award Reference Court enhanced rate per R Type of land reference court awarded Acquired Area in ARE 1 1933/2021 861/2010 4/1 02 H 01 R 06.07.2000 26.05.2003 Rs.707/- Rs.2500/- 02 H 01 R Dry Land 2 1935/2021 1196/2010 38/1 43/C 4H 13R 96R 06.07.2000 26.05.2003 Rs.789/- Rs.761/- Rs.2500/- Rs.1250/- 4H 13R 96R 3 1939/2021 866/2010 39/2 1H 78R 06.07.2000 26.05.2003 Rs.7 56/- Rs.2500/ 1H 78R 4 1958/2021 1155/2010 42/3 2H 31R 06.07.2000 26.05.2003 Rs. 761/- Rs.2500/ Rs.5000/- 131 Dry Land 100 Irrigated 5. Appellants’ lands from village Hatwan have been acquired for Nimna Dudhana Project vide notification dated 06.07.2000. The Reference Court 2/4 3 919-FA.1933-21 & ors (919 to 922).odt refused to grant benefit of escalation. Appellants are praying escalation f or four (4) years @ 10% per annum and reliance is placed on order da ted 23.12.2025 passed in First Appeal No.1956 of 2021. In that case also, land from village Hatwan was acquired and escalation for four (4) years was claimed which was awarded resulting into computation of compensati on @ Rs.3659/- for dry land and Rs.1829/- for Pot Kharab land. In A ppeal No.1958 of 2021, 131 R. of land is a dry land and area of 100 R. is irrigated land. For the irrigated area, appellant shall get double the rate of dry land. On the ground of parity, appellants are entitled to get enhancement. Appellant has not made out a case to treat his land irrigated one. Mer e existence of well in land is not sufficient. I, therefore, pass following order : ORDER (i) First appeals are allowed partly. (ii) The appellants shall be entitled to get compensation @ Rs.3659/- per R. for dry land and in First Appeal No.1958 of 2021 additionally Rs.7318/- shall be fixed for the irrigated area. (iii) The appellants shall not be entitled to interest and statuto ry benefits for the delayed period. (iv) The appellants shall be entitled to interest under Section 28 and 34 from the date of award as per law laid down in the judgment of Full Bench in case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva 3/4 4 919-FA.1933-21 & ors (919 to 922).odt Rangari [2016 AIR (Bom.) 141]. (v) Save and except above modification. Rest of the impugned judgment and award shall stand unaltered. (vi) The appellants shall pay deficit court fees, if any. (vii) Record and proceeding be sent back to the concerned Court, if any. (viii) Award be drawn accordingly. (SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) ... vmk/- 4/4