Bombay High Court
FA/2549/2016 of THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS Vs PRAKASH RAMDAS CHIKHALE KOLI AND ANR on 8 October 2026
& Ors. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 269 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2546 OF 2016 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS VERSUS SANJAY GOBA PATIL ... AGP for appellants/State : Mr. A.D. Wange Advocate for Respondent/claimant : Mr. B.K. Pawar h/f. Mr. A.B. Kale ... WITH CIVIL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
269 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2546 OF 2016
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
VERSUS
SANJAY GOBA PATIL
...
AGP for appellants/State : Mr. A.D. Wange Advocate for Respondent/claimant : Mr. B.K. Pawar h/f. Mr. A.B. Kale
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6246 OF 2011 IN FA/2546/2016
…
270 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2547 OF 2016
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
VERSUS
SHANTARAM YESHWANT PATIL
...
AGP for appellants/State : Mr. B.A. Shinde Advocate for Respondent/claimant : Mr. B.K. Pawar h/f. Mr. A.B. Kale
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6240 OF 2011 IN FA/2547/2016
…
271 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2548 OF 2016
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
VERSUS
SHIVAJI BAJIRAO PATIL AND ORS
...
AGP for appellants/State : Mr. A.D. Wange Advocate for Respondent/claimant : Mr. B.K. Pawar h/f. Mr. A.B. Kale
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6244 OF 2011 IN FA/2548/2016
…
272 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2549 OF 2016
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
VERSUS
PRAKASH RAMDAS CHIKHALE KOLI AND ANR
...
AGP for appellants/State : Mr. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent/claimant : Mr. B.K. Pawar h/f. Mr. A.B. Kale
...
2026:BHC-AUG:48365
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6242 OF 2011 IN FA/2549/2016
…
CORAM
: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated
: October 08, 2026
PER COURT :-
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.
1. As the acquisition proceeding is initiated in the year 1999, heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. By these appeals, the appellants/State assails the judgment and award dated 22.9.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in LAR Nos. 521/2006, 563/2005, 577/2005 and 508/2006.
3. The house properties and constructed area on that properties of the original claimants situated at village Chinchkheda Bk., Tal. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon were acquired for submergence area of Waghur Dam. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be issued on 18.9.1999. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has declared the award on 16.11.2002 and has granted compensation at the rate of Rs.85/- per Sq. Mtr. and for land and for construction as below :- Sr. No. LAR Number House Property number Constructed Area (Sq. Mtrs) Compensation awarded (Rs.)
89.98 2,60,177
81/1A
51.15 88.44 22.25 27.20 1,31,700 1,82,908 43,952 10,251
32.24 47,594
29.20 68,876
4. After accepting the amount under protest, the claimants sought reference under section 18 of the Act. Before the reference court, the claimants relied upon sale instance dated 24.2.1999 from the same village, by which 16.72 sq. mtrs. land was sold for Rs.10,000/- and the rate comes to Rs.598/- per sq. mtr. Even the claimants relied upon the report of expert valuer, who suggested rate of Rs.625/- per sq. mtr. Considering the above, the learned reference court, relying upon the sale instance dated 24.2.1999 has determined the of Rs.600/- per sq. mtr. and granted compensation as under :- Sr. No. LAR Number House Property number Constructed Area (Sq. Mtrs) Compensation awarded (Rs.)
89.98 4,500
81/1A
51.15 88.44 22.25 27.20 4,500 3,975 3,863
32.24 3,150
29.20 4,050
5. Considering the discussion made above, this court is of the view that the learned reference court has considered the sale instance and determined the market value of the acquired land which is just, proper and reasonable. Hence, no case is made out for interference in the order passed by the reference court. The first appeals are devoid of merits and therefore, are dismissed. Pending civil applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) ssc/