Full Judgment Text
1 First Appeal No. 454_2005.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO. 454 OF 2005
Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, through Executive
Engineer, Minor Irrigation Project
Division, Pusad, District Yeotmal ..... Appellant
…..Vs.....
1. Madhukar Natthuji Gole : (Dead)
1(i) Pramod Madhukar Gole (Son),
Aged about 58 years, R/o. Pathard (Gole),
Tah. Ner, District Yeotmal.
1(ii) Mukund Madhukar Gole (Son),
Aged about 55 years, R/o. Bhidi,
Tah. Deoli, District Wardha.
1(iii)Keshav Madhukar Gole (Son),
Aged about 53 years, R/o. Bhidi,
Tah. Deoli, District Wardha.
1(iv)Shobhabai Vithalrao Thakare (Daughter),
Aged major, R/o. Anjanvati,
Tah. Dhamangaon, District Amravati.
2. The State of Maharashtra
through Collector, Yeotmal.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Minor Irrigation Department No.1,
Yeotmal. …...... Respondents
Shri A.B. Patil, Advocate for the appellant.
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 03:01:01 :::
2 First Appeal No. 454_2005.odt
None present for the respondents
CORAM : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.
Date : 26/09/2019
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This is an appeal under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act
against the judgment of Reference Court in LAC No. 2153/2004.
The facts giving rise to the present appeal can be
summarized as under :
The land of respondent no.1 Gat No.155 area 2 hectres 21 R out
of which 1 hector 70 R was required for Ner Project. Notification under
nd
section 4 was published on 2 March 1995. The award was passed on
st
31 January 1998. Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation at the
rate of 28,000/ per hectare. The respondent no.1 challenged the award
before the Reference court and claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/
per hectare. The Reference Court has partly allowed Reference and
granted compensation at the rate of 1,50,000/ for acquired land of 1
hector 07 R (wrongly typed as “007 instead of 70). Hence, the present
appeal.
2. Heard Shri A.B. Patil for the appellant and Advocate Shri
Deshpande Advocate for respondent no.1 and AGP Miss Prabhu for
respondent no.2 and 3. Learned Advocate Shri Deshpande has pointed
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 03:01:01 :::
3 First Appeal No. 454_2005.odt
out decision of this court in First Appeal No. 470/2005, 464/2005 and
1000/2007. In all these appeals, the lands in question were situated at
village Pathard i.e. village of respondent no.1. The land of respondent
no.1 situated in Pathard was acquired for the same project. Therefore
respondent no.1 is entitled for compensation as per the judgment of this
court in the above said appeals.
3. Respondent no.1 is entitled for compensation awarded by
the Reference court. He is also entitled for the compensation for the
trees granted by the Reference court. In view of the judgment of this
court in above said appeals, the appeal is without any merit. Hence,
dismissed with cost. It appears that the Reference court has committed
mistake while typing the area of land. Instead of 1 hector 70 R it is typed
in that judgment 1 hector 07 R. Therefore mistake be corrected. The
respondent no.1 is entitled for compensation of acquired land of Gat no.
155 area 1 hector 70 R land.
JUDGE
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 03:01:01 :::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO. 454 OF 2005
Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, through Executive
Engineer, Minor Irrigation Project
Division, Pusad, District Yeotmal ..... Appellant
…..Vs.....
1. Madhukar Natthuji Gole : (Dead)
1(i) Pramod Madhukar Gole (Son),
Aged about 58 years, R/o. Pathard (Gole),
Tah. Ner, District Yeotmal.
1(ii) Mukund Madhukar Gole (Son),
Aged about 55 years, R/o. Bhidi,
Tah. Deoli, District Wardha.
1(iii)Keshav Madhukar Gole (Son),
Aged about 53 years, R/o. Bhidi,
Tah. Deoli, District Wardha.
1(iv)Shobhabai Vithalrao Thakare (Daughter),
Aged major, R/o. Anjanvati,
Tah. Dhamangaon, District Amravati.
2. The State of Maharashtra
through Collector, Yeotmal.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Minor Irrigation Department No.1,
Yeotmal. …...... Respondents
Shri A.B. Patil, Advocate for the appellant.
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 03:01:01 :::
2 First Appeal No. 454_2005.odt
None present for the respondents
CORAM : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.
Date : 26/09/2019
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This is an appeal under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act
against the judgment of Reference Court in LAC No. 2153/2004.
The facts giving rise to the present appeal can be
summarized as under :
The land of respondent no.1 Gat No.155 area 2 hectres 21 R out
of which 1 hector 70 R was required for Ner Project. Notification under
nd
section 4 was published on 2 March 1995. The award was passed on
st
31 January 1998. Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation at the
rate of 28,000/ per hectare. The respondent no.1 challenged the award
before the Reference court and claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/
per hectare. The Reference Court has partly allowed Reference and
granted compensation at the rate of 1,50,000/ for acquired land of 1
hector 07 R (wrongly typed as “007 instead of 70). Hence, the present
appeal.
2. Heard Shri A.B. Patil for the appellant and Advocate Shri
Deshpande Advocate for respondent no.1 and AGP Miss Prabhu for
respondent no.2 and 3. Learned Advocate Shri Deshpande has pointed
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 03:01:01 :::
3 First Appeal No. 454_2005.odt
out decision of this court in First Appeal No. 470/2005, 464/2005 and
1000/2007. In all these appeals, the lands in question were situated at
village Pathard i.e. village of respondent no.1. The land of respondent
no.1 situated in Pathard was acquired for the same project. Therefore
respondent no.1 is entitled for compensation as per the judgment of this
court in the above said appeals.
3. Respondent no.1 is entitled for compensation awarded by
the Reference court. He is also entitled for the compensation for the
trees granted by the Reference court. In view of the judgment of this
court in above said appeals, the appeal is without any merit. Hence,
dismissed with cost. It appears that the Reference court has committed
mistake while typing the area of land. Instead of 1 hector 70 R it is typed
in that judgment 1 hector 07 R. Therefore mistake be corrected. The
respondent no.1 is entitled for compensation of acquired land of Gat no.
155 area 1 hector 70 R land.
JUDGE
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 03:01:01 :::