SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Bom) 63

2011(5) ALL MR 99
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)
R. M. SAVANT, J.
Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation Appellant
Vs.
Ajabrao Gulabrao Deshmukh & Ors. Respondent
Civil Application Nos. 2752, 2712, 2713, 2718, 2721,2724,2756,2760 & 2764 of 201O
Decided on 17th January, 2011.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 18-Reference-For enhancement of compensation-Appellant, acquiring body not made party before Reference Court-Award of Reference Court not sustainable-Set aside-Matter remanded to Reference Court for de novo consideration by allowing appellant to be impleaded as party in reference proceedings.-The above first appeals arise out of awards of the Reference Court granting enhancement to the respondent/respondents/claimants. It is an undisputed position that the appellant was not a party before the Reference Court. In the light of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Gyan Devi (Dead) by LRs and others, reported at 1995 (2) SCC 326, as also the judgment of the Court in Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Buldhana v. Sadanand Damodhar Mawale and others, reported at 2010 (3) Mh LJ 581, concerning the same acquiring body. The impugned awards in each of the first appeals are unsustainable and are therefore, required to be set aside and are accordingly set aside. The matters are remanded back to the Reference Court for a de novo consideration by allowing the appellant to be impleaded as party in the reference proceedings and permitting the parties to lead fresh evidence.

       Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5-Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 23-Condonation of delay-Application for by acquiring body-Delay caused in filing first appeal by acquiring body-None appears for claimant-No reply filed on behalf of claimants-Application for condonation of delay in filing appeal liable to be allowed.-By the above civil applications, the applicants i.e. the acquiring body seeks condonation of delay caused in filing the first appeals. The lands in question have been acquired for ’Pentakli Minor Irrigation Project’. No affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents/claimants, hence the case put up by the applicants for condonation of delay, has gone uncontroverted and would therefore, have to be accepted, resultantly, the delay in filing the above appeals would therefore, have to be condoned. Civil applications are accordingly allowed and disposed of.

JUDGMENT;-

The above applications and the Appeals were on board on 13.01.20 II when none had appeared on behalf of the respondent! Respondents / claimants, and hence the matters were adjourned for today. When the matters are called out today, the same position continues and none appears for the contesting respondent/ respondents/ claimants, hence this Court is constrained to proceed with the matters in their absence. By order dated 29.10.20I0 the respondents in the above matters were put to notice that the appeals may be heard and decided finally at the stage of admission, in view of the connected issues that arises in all the above Appeals.

2. By the above Civil Applications, the applicants i.e. the acquiring body seeks condonation of delay caused in filing the First Appeals. The lands in question have been acquired for 'Pentakli Minor Irrigation Project'. No affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents/claimants, hence the case put up by the applicants for condonation of delay, has gone uncontroverted and would therefore, have to be accepted, resultantly, the delay in filing the above appeals would therefore, have to be condoned. Civil Applications are accordingly allowed and disposed of.

ON MERITS.

3. By consent of Shri A.B. Patil, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants - acquiring body and Ms. S. lachak and Shri S.Bhagade, learnedA.G.Ps. appearing in the respective matters, the appeals are taken up for hearing. Admit. Heard forthwith.

4. The above First Appeals arise out of Awards of the Reference Court granting enhancement to the respondent/respondents/ claimants. It is an undisputed position that the appellant was not a party before the Reference Court. In the light of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in V.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Gyan Devi [Dead] by Lrs and others reported at 1995 [2] SCC 326, as also the judgment of this Court in Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Buldhana Vs. Sadanand Damodhar Mawale and others reported at 2010 [3] Mh.L.J.581, concerning

The same acquiring body. The impugned Awards in each of the First Appeals are unsustainable and are therefore, required to be set aside and are accordingly set aside. The matters are remanded back to the Reference Court for a denovo consideration by allowing the appellant to be impleaded as party in the reference proceedings and permitting the parties to lead fresh evidence. The above appeals are accordingly allowed, with no orders as to costs. Order accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top