This bench dismissed five first appeals filed by the State of Maharashtra. The court upheld the lower court's maintenance of enhancement of compensation at Rs. 10/- per square meter, citing consistency and the absence of cross-objections.
All appeals dismissed; compensation awarded below maintained.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Lsp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 812 OF 1993
The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant v/s. Shri Rama Kalya Patil-by his legal heirs - 1. Anant Rama Patil & Ors. ..Respondents ALONGWITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 814 OF 1993 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant v/s. Harischandra Hira Patil & others ..Respondents ALONGWITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 816 OF 1993 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant v/s. Shri Parashuram Bhiwa Patil ..Respondents ALONGWITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 817 OF 1993 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant v/s. Ramesh Rama Patil & others. ..Respondents ALONGWITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 818 OF 1993 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant v/s. Shri Ambaji Bhalchandra Mhatre ..Respondents Mr.S.N. Gawade, AGP for the Appellant Mr. K.N.Kore for Respondent
2
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED : 17th September, 2007
P.C.
| This | Co | urt by |
order | dated | 17-1-2 | 005 | in | First | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no. | 1132 | of | 1994 | between | State | of | Maharashtra | v/s. | |
| Rajaram | and | further | in | first appeal |
no. |
512 | of | 1992 | |
| State | of | Maharashtra | v/s. | Sa | danand | Patil | dated | ||
| 21-12-2005 | have dis |
missed | all |
the | State | appeals | whereby |
the challenge was made to the grant of enhancement of
compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq.feet.
| parties. | Both the par |
ties fairly |
pointe | d | out | that | the |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| judgment | passed by this |
Court in |
the | above | cases | covers | |
| the facts |
and circumstances |
of the |
pres | ent | case |
s also |
as |
| lands are |
identically | placed and |
situat | ed | i | n | village |
| Koparkhairane | which is |
in Taluka |
and | District | Thane | and | |
| the land |
acquisition re |
ferences arisi |
ng | ou | t of |
the | same |
| dispute and |
in the same |
villages | have | been | duly | assessed |
and this Court in all those matters has maintained the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per square meter.
| 3. | The | refore, taking no | te of all these factors as | well | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| as | facts | and | circumstances | of the |
case | and | as | the |
| enhanced | c |
ompensation | as awarded |
is | just | and | fair, | there |
| is | no | reason to |
disturb the |
findings | arrived | at | by | the |
3
Learned trial Court and especially when there is no cross objection filed by the claimant.
[ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the enhanced compensation of Rs. 10/- per sq. meter awarded by the lower court was just and fair.
The State of Maharashtra
Anant Rama Patil & Ors.
Harischandra Hira Patil
Parashuram Bhiwa Patil
Ramesh Rama Patil
Ambaji Bhalchandra Mhatre
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
