STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. EKNATH MADHAV PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the parties submits that these three appeals can be disposed of by common Judgment and order, since the facts and issues, which arise are common.

(2.) The challenge in these appeals is to the common Judgment and award dated 17.4.2000 made by the Reference Court in L.A.R. Nos.1173 of 1998, 1174 of 1998 and 1175 of 1998. Therefore, it will be appropriate that these appeals be disposed of by a common Judgment and order.

(3.) Mr.B.V.Virde learned AGP for the appellant submits that the enhancement granted by the Reference Court by relying upon the sale instance at Exh.15 is not proper because the sale instance was admittedly not in respect of land from the same village i.e. Umale from which the lands of respondents/claimants came to be acquired. He submits that in absence of any evidence as to comparability, the Reference Court was not justified in relying upon the sale instance at Exh.15 and on such basis award any enhancement.