Bombay High Court
FA/130/2013 of THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION NANDED Vs SUMITRABAI MADHAVRAO DEOKARE AND ORS on 12 October 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 30 FIRST APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2013 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, NANDED VERSUS SUMITRABAI MADHAVRAO DEOKARE AND OTHERS ... Mr. P.G. Rodge, Advocate for appellant Mrs. Bharati B. Gunjal, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. B.A.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
30 FIRST APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2013
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, NANDED
VERSUS
SUMITRABAI MADHAVRAO DEOKARE AND OTHERS
...
Mr. P.G. Rodge, Advocate for appellant
Mrs. Bharati B. Gunjal, Advocate for respondent No.1
Mr. B.A. Shinde, AGP for respondent Nos.2 and 3
...
CORAM :
SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE :
12th OCTOBER, 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER :
. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
By this appeal, the appellant assail the Judgment and Award dated 08.03.2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Kandhar in Land Acquisition Reference No.157 of 2004.
Learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned AGP submit that the compensation enhanced by the learned Reference Court does not exceed four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. 2026:BHC-AUG:48536
30_FA_130_2013
In view of the aforesaid submissions and having regard to the policy decision of the State Government contained in Government Resolution No.Sankirna-2014/Prak.Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4
dated
03.11.2016
with Corrigenda dated 23.02.2017 and 13.08.2018 to the said Government Resolution, took a decision not to challenge the reference, if compensation is enhanced only up to four times.
Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed.
The claimant is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by the State/acquiring body before the learned Reference Court, if any.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending Civil Application, if any, does not survive and is disposed of accordingly. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) agd