Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra v. Shri Jagannath Bapu Parab

Bombay HC30 Mar 2009FA/614/1996

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant, State of Maharashtra, filed a first appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging the award granting Rs. 1000 per Are. The Court dismissed the appeal, relying on its prior decision in First Appeal No. 150 of 1996 regarding identical land acquisition for the same purpose, where the same compensation rate was confirmed.

What did the court decide?

The first appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra is dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Shri Jagannath Bapu Parab — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

:1:

¶2

pdp
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
 FIRST APPEAL NO. 614 OF 1996
 The State of Maharashtra
 (Through the Spl. Land
 Acquisition Officer, Sindhudurg,
 At Kudal) ..Appellant
 Vs.
 Shri Jagannath Bapu Parab
 since deceased through his LRs.
 1a. Shri Ashok Jagannath Parab
 and ors. ..Respondents
 Ms. S.P. Manchekar, AGP for appellant.
 Ms. Sheetal Sonawane for respondents.
CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE &
RAVI K. DESHPANDE,JJ.
 Date : March 30, 2009.

¶3

P.C.:

¶4

 1. This appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land
 Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act for short) arises from
 the award dated 7/4/1995 passed by the learned Joint
 Civil Judge, S.D., Ratnagiri at Sawantwadi in Land
 Reference No. 35 of 1992.

¶5

:2:

¶6

 2. The respondent’s agricultural land came to be
 acquired by the Government of Maharashtra for
 establishing the Headquarter of Sindhudurg District at
 Oros and the land was located in village Ranbambuli,
 Taluka Kudal, District Sindhudurg. Notification under
 Section 4 of the Act was issued on 28/2/1989 and the
 Land Acquisition Officer passed his award on 6/1/1992
 granting compensation on the basis of the land revenue
 as shown below:

¶7

 Sr.No. Land Revenue Compensation per R.

¶8

 ----- ------------ -------------------

¶9

 . Being dis-satisfied with the compensation

¶10

 granted by the Land Acquisition Officer, the

¶11

 respondent-owner - Shri Jagannath Parab filed an
 application under Section 18 of the Act which was
 referred by the Collector to the Reference Court. The
 claimant had claimed compensation at the rate of

¶12

:3:

¶13

 Rs.2000/- per Are. The claim was partly allowed by
 determining the compensation rate at Rs.1000/- per

¶14

 Are. The State is aggrieved by the said award.

¶15

 3. First Appeal No. 150 of 1996, which came to

¶16

 be decided by this court on 16/3/2009, arose from the
 award passed by the very same court in Land Reference
 No. 29 of 1991. The notification under Section 4 was
 the same i.e. dated 28/2/1989. The Land Acquisition
 Officer had passed his award on 14/3/1991. The land
 was acquired for the very same purpose i.e.
 establishing the Headquarter of Sindhudurg District
 and the compensation fixed by the court was at
 Rs.1000/- per Are. While dismissing the appeal filed

¶17

 by the State Government, we have confirmed the rate of
 Rs.1000/- per Are. For the reasons stated in judgment
 rendered by this court in First Appeal No. 150 of

¶18

 1996, this appeal also must fail.

¶19

 4. Hence the appeal is dismissed. The parties to
 bear their own costs.

¶20

:4:

¶21

(Ravi K. Deshpande,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

The State of Maharashtra v. Shri Jagannath Bapu Parab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Shri Jagannath Bapu Parab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India Vs Shri Shailesh Pani Purwatha Sahakari Sanstha Ltd.

The Government of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Pandharinath Babu Govari D/H Taibai Pandharinath Govari and Ors.

Leelabai Shankarrao Bhapkar and Othrs Vs Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar D.H. Shushila Madhav Bhapkar