Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.
Chandaba & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 13332, 13336 of 2022, 24, 28, 57 of 2023
Decided On : 02-02-2023
Land Acquisition Act - Reference Proceedings - Section 18 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitions arose from separate References under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging the Awards dismissing the reference seeking enhancement of compensation for acquired land.
Finding of the Court:
The reference Court dismissed the references on the ground of non-prosecution by the claimants, who failed to adduce evidence for redetermination of market value. The Court held that the claimants were not entitled to enhancement in compensation and directed the awards to be drawn up accordingly.
Issues: The issues framed by the reference Court included whether the compensation awarded was insufficient and whether the claimants were entitled to enhancement in compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the reference proceedings should be decided on merits, and the claimants should be given the opportunity to lead evidence in support of their claim for enhanced compensation.
Final Decision: The Court quashed and set aside the awards, restored the land acquisition references to their original position, and directed the concerned Reference Courts to permit the claimants to lead oral and documentary evidence and dispose of the references expeditiously.
JUDGMENT
Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mrs. G.L. Deshpande, Mr. S.N. Morampalle, Mr. R.B. Bagul and Mr. S.S. Dande, learned AGPs waive service on behalf of the respondent - State in the respective matters. At the joint request of learned counsels appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finally at the admission stage.
2. These writ petitions arising of out of separate References under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 involve a common issue and hence are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
3. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.13332 of 2022 challenges the Award dated 13.12.2018 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.5 of 2011 dismissing the reference seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of acquisition of land bearing Survey Nos.2/2/1 and 2/2/2 to the extent of 56 R situated at village Elechpur Nanded, Dist. Nanded.
4. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.13336 of 2022 challenges the Award dated 05.04.2016 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.100 of 2011 dismissing the reference seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of acquisition of land bearing Survey No.2/2 to the extent of 35 R situated at village Elechpur, Dist. Nanded.
5. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.24 of 2023 challenges the Award dated 22.01.2019 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.18 of 2011 dismissing the reference seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of acquisition of land bearing Survey No.6/3 to the extent of 02 R situated at village Elechpur Nanded, Dist. Nanded.
6. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.28 of 2023 challenges the Award dated 14.03.2019 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.4 of 2011 dismissing the reference seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of acquisition of land bearing Survey No.6/2 to the extent of 35 R situated at village Elechpur Nanded, Dist. Nanded.
7. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.57 of 2023 challenges the Award dated 30.01.2019 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded in LAR No.135 of 2011 dismissing the reference seeking enhancement of compensation in respect of acquisition of land bearing Survey No.2/2 to the extent of 02 R situated at village Elechpur Nanded, Dist. Nanded.
8. Heard Mr. P.B. Rakhunde, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mrs. G.L. Deshpande, Mr. S.N. Morampalle, Mr. R.B. Bagul and Mr. S.S. Dande, learned AGPs appearing for the respondent - State in the respective matters.
9. Mr. P.B. Rakhunde, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution. He would further urge that the reference Court has not decided the claim on merits and dismissed the reference on the ground that the claimant has not bothered to pursue the matter for establishing his claim and has thus failed to adduce any evidence for the purpose of redetermination of the market value of the acquired property. As such, he would contend that the Award passed by the Reference Court is liable to be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded for consideration afresh. On the ground of delay in filing the present Petitions, which are filed in the year 2023, whereas the Awards in the individual References have been passed in the year 2016 to 2019, he would submit that due to some miscommunication between the petitioner and his Counsel, there is delay in filing the Petitions. He would submit that the Petitioners are agreeable to waiving of the interest for the period of the delay.
10. As far as the delay is concerned, it is necessary to set out the relevant dates. Writ Petition No.13332 of 2022 challenges the Award dated 13.12.2018 passed in LAR No.5 of 2011, Writ Petition No.13336 of 2022 challenges the Award dated 05.04.2016 passed in LAR No
The reference proceedings under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act should be decided on merits, and claimants should be given the opportunity to lead evidence in support of their claim for enhanc....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the reference Courts are required to decide the claims on merits, and the claimants are entitled to lead evidence in support of their claim fo....
The main legal point established is that the reference Court must decide the claim on merits and determine the market value afresh based on the material produced before it, following the guidelines s....
The reference Court must treat the reference as an original proceeding and determine the market value afresh based on the material produced before it. The award under Section 26 of the Land Acquisiti....
The reference proceedings under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution, and the reference court must determine the market value afresh based on the material pr....
Limitation under Section 18(b) of Land Acquisition Act runs from actual/constructive knowledge of award contents if no Section 12(2) notice; market value from pre-notification sales with escalation.
Knowledge of the award is crucial for invoking the statutory provisions for reference under the Land Acquisition Act, and failure to demonstrate lack of knowledge results in dismissal of the applicat....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
