Judgment in first appeal No. 212 of 2002 regarding land acquisition compensation. Court dismissed the appeal because the State had adopted evidence from a related case, precluding it from disputing compensation quantum. Cross objection by the claimant was rejected for insufficient grounds.
First appeal dismissed; cross objection rejected.
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.
920 fa212.02
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
920 FIRST APPEAL NO. 212 OF 2002
WITH CROSS OBJECTION (ST.) NO. 3209 OF 2003
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VERSUS KRISHNA DHONDIBA NAGARGOJE
AGP for Appellant : Mr. G.O. Wattamwar Advocate for Respondents : Mr. S. L. Bhapkar
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J. DATED : 18th APRIL, 2017
PER COURT :-
920 fa212.02
-2-
“4. The reading of the judgment dated 11th March, 2008 would show that arising out of the same acquisition proceedings for the same purposes, the land acquisition reference application No. 105 of 1986 was filed out of which first appeal No. 105 of 2008 had arisen as the present appellant/State had challenged therein the enhancement in the compensation. The appeal was dismissed summarily in the said case.
5. The copy of the judgment would show that in that case, the State had not chosen to file appeal against the judgment and award passed in land acquisition reference No. 105 of 1986, arising out of the same proceedings and it was observed, therefore, that it would not be open for the State to dispute the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Reference Court in the matter before the Court.”
( V. K. JADHAV, J.)
rlj/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the State can dispute the quantum of compensation awarded by the Reference Court in pending acquisition proceedings when the State had already adopted evidence from a similar reference case wi
Whether there is a sufficient case to entertain the cross objection filed by the claimant.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
KRISHNA DHONDIBA NAGARGOJE
V. K. JADHAV
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
