Partly allowed

Sushmabai Ramsing Girase v. the Collector, Collector Office, Dhule and Ors.

Bombay HC14 Jan 2026FA/589/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land acquisition compensation enhancement; 85% of private valuer's report versus 75%; 10% deduction held arbitrary; notification u/Sec. 4 Land Acquisition Act dated 30.03.2010; award dated 18.05.2013; interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act from date of award; house properties village Divi, Tq. Sindhkheda, Dist. Dhule; Lok Adalat formula 08.02.2020; batch of appeals decided 27.04.202

What did the court decide?

All seven first appeals partly allowed; compensation enhanced in each appeal to 85% of the private valuer's report (Rs. 5,65,250/- in F.A. 336/2025; Rs. 3,88,450/- in F.A. 337/2025; Rs. 2,58,400/- in

Sushmabai Ramsing Girase vs the Collector, Collector Office… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

2026:BHC-AUG:3954

¶2

1 fa 336.25

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT of JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

31 FIRST APPEAL NO. 336 of 2025

¶5

Shankar Kalu Girase Since deceased through his L.Rs. Gorakh shankar Girase and others .. Appellants Versus The Collector, Collector Office, Dhule and others .. Respondents

¶6

Shri K. M. More, Advocate a/w Shri Firoj Ahmad Shirpurkar and Shri Jay R. Paundale, Advocates for the Appellant. Shri N. D. Raje, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri Ajay D. Pawar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.

¶7

AND

¶8

32 FIRST APPEAL NO. 337 of 2025

¶9

Karan Govinda Girase .. Appellant Versus

¶10

The Collector (Land Acquisition) No. 1, Medium Irrigation Project Dhule and others .. Respondents

¶11

Shri K. M. More, Advocate a/w Shri Firoj Ahmad Shirpurkar and Shri Jay R. Paundale, Advocates for the Appellant. Shri S. N. Morampalle, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Shri Ajay D. Pawar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.

¶12

AND

¶13

33 FIRST APPEAL NO. 580 of 2025

¶14

Nathesingh Onkar Girase .. Appellant Versus The Collector Dhule and others .. Respondents

¶15

Shri K. M. More, Advocate a/w Shri Firoj Ahmad Shirpurkar and Shri Jay R. Paundale, Advocates for the Appellant.

¶16

2 fa 336.25

¶17

Shri N. D. Raje, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri Ajay D. Pawar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.

¶18

AND

¶19

34 FIRST APPEAL NO. 581 of 2025

¶20

Komal Bhimsing Girase .. Appellant Versus The Collector, Collector Office Dhule and others .. Respondents

¶21

Shri K. M. More, Advocate a/w Shri Firoj Ahmad Shirpurkar and Shri Jay R. Paundale, Advocates for the Appellant. Shri S. N. Morampalle, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri Ajay D. Pawar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.

¶22

AND

¶23

35 FIRST APPEAL NO. 587 of 2025

¶24

Ramsing Shamsing Girase .. Appellant Versus The Collector Dhule and others .. Respondents

¶25

¶26

AND

¶27

37 FIRST APPEAL NO. 589 of 2025

¶28

Sushmbai Ramsing Girase .. Appellant Versus The Collector, Collector Office Dhule and others .. Respondents

3 fa 336.25

AND

38 FIRST APPEAL NO. 591 of 2025

¶33

Ramsing Shamsing Girase .. Appellant Versus The Collector Dhule and others .. Respondents

¶34

¶35

CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 28TH JANUARY, 2026.

¶36

FINAL ORDER :

¶37

. Heard both sides finally.

¶38

These appeals can be disposed of by common order relying on earlier decisions rendered by the Coordinate Benches arising out of self same acquisition proceedings.

¶39

The acquisition is in respect of house properties from village Divi, Tq. Sindhkheda, Dist. Dhule. Notification U/Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 30.03.2010. Award was passed on 18.05.2013. Appellants have produced on record valuation reports. The valuer was also examined. The Reference Court accepted valuation reports to the extent of 75%.

¶40

Learned counsel for the appellants has placed on record the consistent view taken by this Court in awarding compensation by

¶41

4 fa 336.25

¶42

accepting 85% of the rate given by the private valuer. According to him common order dated 05.12.2025 passed in First Appeal No. 2071 of 2024 with other connected matters covers the present matters.

¶43

Learned counsel for the acquiring body would oppose the submissions. It is submitted that 85% of the rate given by the valuer cannot be the rule of thumb. In a settlement before the Lok Adalat that formula was accepted and that cannot be made applicable in the present matters.

¶44

I have considered rival submissions of the parties.

¶45

While disposing of first appeal in Lok Adalat held on 08.02.2020 the formula of accepting rate to the extent of 85% of the valuation report was adopted. It is further followed in batch of appeals decided on 27^th April, 2023 and the same has been consistently followed while disposing of other first appeals. In identical situation when house properties from self same village, under self same notification were acquired, this Court vide common order dated 05.12.2025 enhanced the compensation by accepting the report of valuation to 85%. I find there is no difficulty in accepting the said formula, otherwise the approach would be discriminatory.

¶46

The Reference Court in the impugned judgment unnecessarily deducted 10% from the valuation report. Therefore,

¶47

5 fa 336.25

¶48

valuation report is accepted to the extent of 75% only instead of 85%. The difference is writ large. The deduction of 10% is arbitrary and against law laid down by this Court as referred above.

¶49

Following material particulars are eloquent to show the total valuation and its 85%

¶50

Sr. No.	First Appeal No.	Valuation Report Exhibit	Amount of valuation report	85% of the valuation report
1	336/2025	44/C	Rs. 6,65,000/-	Rs. 5,65,250/-
2	337/2025	26/C	Rs. 4,57,000/-	Rs. 3,88,450/-
3	580/2025	34	Rs. 3,04,000/-	Rs. 2,58,400/-
4	581/2025	39/C	Rs. 4,32,000/-	Rs. 3,67,200/-
5	587/2025	40/C	Rs. 5,12,000/-	Rs. 4,35,200/-
6	589/2025	31/C	Rs. 2,66,000/-	Rs. 2,26,100/-
7	591/2025	28/C	Rs. 6,26,000/-	Rs. 5,32,100/-

¶51

As stated in above referred chart, the appellants are entitled to receive 85% of the valuation report shown in last column in each appeal. It is desirable to allow first appeals.

¶52

I, therefore, pass following order.

¶53

O R D E R

¶54

a. All these appeals are partly allowed.

¶55

b. Appellants are entitled to receive compensation in following

¶56

6 fa 336.25

¶57

manner :

¶58

i) In First Appeal No. 336 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 5,65,250/-.

¶59

ii) In First Appeal No. 337 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 3,88,450/-.

¶60

iii) In First Appeal No. 580 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 2,58,400/-.

¶61

iv) In First Appeal No. 581 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 3,67,200/-.

¶62

v) In First Appeal No. 587 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 4,35,200/-.

¶63

vi) In First Appeal No. 589 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 2,26,100/-.

¶64

vii) In First Appeal No. 591 of 2025, the appellant is entitled to receive Rs. 5,32,100/-.

¶65

c. The respondent – acquiring body shall pay the interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act from the date of award.

¶66

d. The respondent – acquiring body shall deposit the amount of enhanced compensation as aforesaid, within a period of one year from the date of this order directly in Reference Court and on such deposit, all these appellants – claimants are permitted to withdraw their respective amounts of compensation along with the interest.

¶67

7 fa 336.25

¶68

e. In case the payment is delayed by the respondent – acquiring body even after period of one year then it shall carry the statutory interest till its realization.

¶69

f. The concerned appellants – claimants are directed to pay deficit Court fees, if any, at the time of modification of award.

¶70

g. The awards be modified accordingly.

¶71

h. Appellants shall not be entitled to interest and statutory benefits for the delayed period in the respective appeals.

¶72

i. Record and proceedings shall be sent back.

¶73

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]

¶74

bsb/Jan. 26

Sushmabai Ramsing Girase v. the Collector, Collector Office, Dhule and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushmabai Ramsing Girase v. the Collector, Collector Office, Dhule and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kasabai Shivram Rajput, L.Rs. Gangaram Died Thr Lrs Harnabai G. Rajput and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Aurangabad

Thakusing Bannusing Rajput vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Aurangabad

Israr Ahmed Noor Mohammed Khan and Others vs Ashfaq Ul Haque Abdul Haque Khan and Others

Shri. Khakidas Baba Math (Maheshwari) through Its Trustee and Gpa, Deepak Bansilal Kabra and Others vs Vijayshankar Mulchand Mishra

Bhagirathibai W/O Rambhau Yadav Died through Rambhau Died through Vasant and Others vs the State of Maharashtra through District Collector, Beed

Shankar Kalu Girase Died Thr Lrs Gorakh Shankar Girase and Ors. vs the Collector, Collector Office, Dhule and Ors.