High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 02 BOM CK 0069

Special Land Acquisition Officer (I) vs Vimalbai Waman Chaudhari

Bombay High Court · Decided on 16 February 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.S. Sonak
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
1192 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 268 words
1.

Heard Mr. Phule, learned AGP for the appellant-State and Mr. Malpani, learned counsel holding for Mr. Kale, for respondents- claimants.

2.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that all these appeals can be disposed of by common judgment and order since, all these appeals relate to acquisition of lands for Waghur project. Only the difference in these matters and the matters disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer (III), Jalgaon and another Vs. Bhagwat Vithal Sonwane, 2009(4) Mh.L.J. 308, is that in these matters the acquisition was under section 4 notification dated 17.08.1997 and, in the case before Division Bench, the acquisition was under section 4 notification dated 21.08.1997. This is hardly any significant difference.

3.

Learned counsel for the parties point out that the issue raised in these appeals stand covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the Bhagwat (supra). In the said decision, the Division Bench, in respect of acquisition for the very same project and under the very same notification has determined compensation for Bagayat land at Rs. 4,00,000/- per Hectare, Jirayat land at Rs. 2,00,000/- per Hectare and for Pot Kharab land at Rs. 1,00,000/- per Hectare.

4.

In all these matters, the determination of compensation by the reference Court is also the same as determined by the Division Bench in the case of Bhagwat (supra). Therefore, for reasons set out in the decision of the Division Bench, these appeals are liable to be dismissed and are hereby dismissed.

5.

There shall be no order as to costs.