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

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.
Chandaba W/o.
Gangaram Pauyed and Ors. – Petitioners
versus
State of Maharashtra and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No.13332 of 2022 and Writ Petition No.13336 of 2022 and Writ Petition No.24 of 2023 and Writ Petition No.28 of 2023 and Writ Petition No.57 of 2023
Decided on 2.2.2023

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitionerss: Mr. P.B. Rakhunde, AGP
For the Respondent - State:Mrs. G.L. Deshpande, Mr. S.N. Morampalle, Mr. R.B. Bagul and Mr. S.S. Dande, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
Reference has to be decided by Civil Court on the basis of material before it on merits.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 18 and 26 – Reference – Reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act is not an appeal against award – Court cannot take into account material relied upon by Land Acquisition Officer in his award unless same material is produced and proved before Court – Reference has to be decided by Civil Court on the basis of material before it on merits – Considering form that award has to take which is specified in Section 26 of Land Acquisition Act, Award which has been passed by Reference Court in these writ petitions cannot be said to be award within meaning of Section 26 of Act – Reference Court is bound to assess material which has been produced on record – Reference Court is bound to assess material which has been produced on record – Land Acquisition References restored to their original position. (Paras 17, 29, 31, 32 and 36)

Result: Writ Petitions allowed.

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 re-determination 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 i

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top