Dismissed¶25

The State of Maharashtra and Others v. Kokilabai Pralhad Patil

Land Acquisition – Enhancement of compensation

Bombay HC20 Sept 2025CA/4508/2014

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Kishore C. Sant, J., 20 September 2025), FAST/2666/2014 with Civil Application 4508 of 2014: State of Maharashtra v. Kokilabai Pralhad Patil. Condonation of 2504 days' delay allowed. Land acquisition under Section 4, Land Acquisition Act (notification 16-03-1989, award 05-12-1992) for NH No.6, Gat No.111/2, Jalgaon; LAR No.1500/1998 enhancement from Rs.171/R to Rs.2,000/R (Rs.38,000 total); sale instances of 1985 and 1987; jirayat land; no perversity; appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

First Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs; in view of dismissal, pending Civil Applications, if any, do not survive and stand disposed off. ¶25

The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs Kokilabai Pralhad Patil — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

( 1 ) 918-CA-4508-2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

918 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4508 OF 2014

¶4

IN FAST/2666/2014

¶5

The State Of Maharashtra And Others VERSUS

¶6

Kokilabai Pralhad Patil

¶7

Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Applicants-State.

¶8

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 20^th SEPTEMBER 2025.

¶9

PC :-

¶10

Inspite of service, none for the respondent.

¶11

This civil application is filed for condonation of delay of 2504 days caused in filing the first appeal.

¶12

For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed.

¶13

Delay stands condoned. Office to register the First Appeal.

¶14

Civil Application stands disposed off.

¶15

FIRST APPEAL

¶16

This appeal is filed by the State challenging the Judgment and

¶17

Ethape

¶18

Award dated 22^nd September 2006, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in LAR No. 1500/1998, whereby the learned Reference Court has enhanced the amount of compensation granted to the respondent-claimant.

¶19

The land of the respondent-claimant admeasuring 19R from Gat No.111/2 came to be acquired for National Highway No.6. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be issued on 16^th March 1989. The award was passed on 5^th December 1992. The learned SLAO awarded total compensation of Rs.3259/- which comes to Rs.171 per R.

¶20

By way of impugned Judgment and Award, the learned Reference Court enhanced the amount of compensation and granted rate of Rs.2,000/- per R. The Total amount awarded is thus Rs.38,000/-.

¶21

The learned AGP vehemently argued that the enhancement of the amount is exhorbitant. There is no satisfactory evidence on record to grant compensation at such higher rate. The learned SLAO had rightly determined the amount. No interference is required in a Reference.

¶22

Ethape

¶23

This Court has gone through the impugned Judgment and Award. The learned Judge while coming to the conclusion about the valuation has considered the sale-deed dated 22^nd May 1987 and 17^th January 1985. Both the sale instances are four years and two years prior to issuance of Section 4 notification respectively. This Court thus finds that he has rightly relied upon both the sale instances. The land is considered to be jirayat land and has granted the compensation and has enhanced the amount. This Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the order passed by the learned Reference Court. No case is made out to set aside the impugned Judgment and Award. Hence, the following order:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(i) First Appeal stands dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶26

(ii) In view of dismissal of First Appeal, pending Civil Applications, if any, do not survive and same stand disposed off.

¶27

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.]

¶28

Ethape

The State of Maharashtra and Others v. Kokilabai Pralhad Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra and Others v. Kokilabai Pralhad Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarjubai M.Agrawal. Vs Ghanshamdas Surajmal Agrawal (L.Rs.)Kaushalyabai.

Bhawarilal B.Daga. Vs Bhagchand P.Kathed and Others.

Jadhavbai Mishrimal Lalwani. Vs Manimal Ujamachi Vora.

Sandhyaben Ishwarlal Parekh. Vs Santosh Onkar Bagale and Others.

Shaikh Abdul Sattar Hasanbhai. Vs Bismillahbee Wazir Shaikh.

The State of Maharashtra Thro. Collector Osmanabad Vs Shevantabai Rangnath Pawar (Died) Thr Lrs. Gundu Bapurao Pawar