V.I.D.C. Thr. Its Exe. Engineer v. Kalawati Wd/O Ukanda Yesansure And 3 ORS

fa544.10.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.544 OF 2010 Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Through its Executive Enigneer, Bembla Project Division, Taq. and Dist. Yavatmal.

.....APPELLANT ...V E R S U S...

1.Kalawati Wd/o Ukanda Yesansure Aged Major 2.Devidas Ukanda Yesansure Aged Major Both 1 and 2 are R/o Takalgaon, Tq. Babhulgaon, Dist. Yavatmal.

3.The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Yavatmal.

4.The Special Land Acquisition Minor Irrigation Works No.1, Yavatmal, .... RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.B. Patil, Advocate for appellant.

Shri K.S. Narwade, Advocate for respondent nos.1 and 2. Shri A.M. Kadukar, A.G.P. for respondent nos.3 and 4. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J .

DATED :- 4 th August, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

.

Heard.

2.

Learned counsel for appellant Shri A.B. Patil submits that the issue involved in this appeal is covered by the

fa544.10.odt judgments in First Appeal Nos.910 of 2016 and 1402 of 2008, wherein the appellant-V.I.D.C. accepted the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per hectare as enhanced by the Land Acquisition Officer for the lands situated in Mouja Takalgaon, Tq. Bahulgaon, District Yavatmal, which was acquired by Notification dated 18.02.1993 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is further submitted that in the present appeal the subject land situated in the same village i.e. Takalgaon, Tq. Bahulgaon, District Yavatmal and the acquisition was under the same notification dated 18.02.1993 and the rates enhanced in this appeal is Rs.1,00,000/- per hectare.

3.

Considering the submission, as issue involved is already covered by the aforesaid judgments and I do not find any reason to take a different view, the present appeal is bereft of any merit and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE Wagh