Bombay High CourtCAF/3335/2015ca disposed off

The Executive Engineer, Khadakpurna Project Division, V. I. D. C., Deulgaon Raja v. Ganesh Prakash Dandale And 2 Others

2016-06-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice P.B. Varale2 pages

2206caf3335.15.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION F. NO.3335/2015 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.12386/2015 The Executive Engineer, Khadakpurna Project Division, Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Deulgaon Raja, Dist. Buldana ...Versus...

Ganesh Prakash Dandale and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.S. Godbole, Advocate for applicant/appellant Ms T.H. Udeshi, AGP for respondent nos.2 and 3 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.

DATE : 22.06.2016 Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.2 and 3. None appears for the respondent no.1, though served. For the reasons stated in the application, the civil application is allowed. Delay is condoned.

FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.12386/2015 Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.2 and 3. None appears for the respondent no.1, though served. Shri Godbole, the learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the reference Court erred in awarding the compensation treating the lands as of the similar quality lands when the material placed on record clearly reflects that the lands acquired of the claimant differ in quality. He submitted that the piece of

2206caf3335.15.odt 1 R land out of the acquired land of the claimant was irrigated land, 26 R land was seasonally irrigated and 27 R land was an area referred to as differed area.

In such situation, the reference Court ought not to have treated the lands of equal quality and ought not to have awarded the compensation at the exorbitant rate.

ADMIT.

Ms T.H. Udeshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3. JUDGE Wadkar