Bombay High Court
Smt. Jijabai Nagu Murte vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 24 October, 2016
Bench: S.P. Deshmukh
1 CRA-116.16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 116 OF 2016
Smt. Jijabai w/o Nagu Murte,
Age: major, Occ: Household,
R/o: Murshadpur, Tq: Omerga,
Dist:Osmanabad ......Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Collector,
Osmanabad. ..... Respondent
WITH
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2016
Bhaskar Namdeo More,
Age: major, Occ: Agri.
R/o: Murshadpur, Tq: Omerga,
Dist: Osmanabad. .....Applicant
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector,
Osmanabad.
2. The District Rehabilitation officer,
Osmanabad. .... Respondents
WITH
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 118 OF 2016
Tukaram Rama More,
Age: major, Occ: Agri.,
R/o: Murshadpur, Tq: Omerga,
::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:39:22 :::
2 CRA-116.16.doc
Dist: Osmanabad. .....Applicant
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Osmanabad.
2. The District Rehabilitation officer,
Osmanabad. .... Respondents
WITH
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 119 OF 2016
Sheshrao Kishan Mali,
Age: major, Occ: Agri.,
R/o: Sastur, Tq: Omerga,
Dist: Osmanabad. ...Applicant
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Osmanabad.
2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Manjara Project, Osmanabad. ....Respondents
WITH
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 120 OF 2016
Digambar s/o Sopan More,
Age: major, Occ: Agri.,
R/o: Murshadpur, Tq: Omerga,
Dist: Osmanabad. .....Applicant
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through the Collector, Osmanabad. .... Respondents
Mr. Shoyab Shaikh, Advocate for applicants
::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:39:22 :::
3 CRA-116.16.doc
Mr. A.B. Basarkar, Assistant Government Pleader for
respondents in Civil Revision Applications No. 116 and 117
OF 2016, and Mr. Y.G. Gujarathi, Assistant Government
Pleader for respondents in Civil Revision Applications No.
118,119 and 120 of 2016.
CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 24th October, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned
counsel for parties finally, by consent.
2. Applicants are aggrieved by the rejection of their
respective land acquisition references bearing numbers
1081 of 2009, 1072 of 2009, 1076 of 2009, 23 of 2008
and 1074 of 2009 by the reference court [Civil Judge,
Senior Division, Omerga] for non placing on record any
material evidencing and lending credence to the claims
under the land acquisition reference, under judgments and
orders dated 08-06-2010, 05-03-2011, 29-03-2012, and
05-03-2011 respectively.
3. Learned counsel for applicants refers to that these
civil revision applications had got delayed, however, delay
in filing the same has already been condoned.
4 CRA-116.16.doc
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits the
applicants are the rustic villagers and due to their poor
economic condition, it had been difficult for them to attend
the court as they come from remote area lacking in
communication and other facilities.
5. The land acquisition references came to be dismissed
under order dated 08-06-2010 by civil judge, senior
division, Omerga, primarily for the reason that the claims
of the applicants could not be substantiated for want of
leading evidence in the matters. Learned counsel has
contended while land acquisition references had been
lodged, it had been given to understand that after
appearing in the land acquisition references, it will take
some time for adjudication and that further progress in the
matter would be communicated as and when required and
thus the claimants had been under bonafide impression
that they would be informed about progress in the matters.
However, communication had not come to the applicants
about stage of the land acquisition references and in the
circumstances resulted into rejection of the same for want
of evidence. It has been recorded by learned judge while
5 CRA-116.16.doc
passing the order that references had been pending from a
long time and from time to time had been transferred from
one court to another and had been lastly assigned to him
around 2009 and thereafter the matters appear to have
progressed and under aforesaid order dated 08-06-2010
rejection has occurred. It appears that it is during this
period of one year that the applicants could not make it to
the court. Before that, the matters had been pending for
about more than ten years. It is thereafter the applicants
while they became aware had been before this court and
delay appears to have been condoned.
6. Looking at aforesaid, the circumstances should
receive their due. Though learned Assistant Government
Pleaders appearing for respondents in respective matters
have reservations about the contention being advanced, I
deem it expedient to grant these civil revision applications
since the matter relates to compensation in respect
acquisition of immovable property and further the
contention of the applicants, them coming from remote
area lacking communication and transport facilities have
not been disputed with any credible material. In such
6 CRA-116.16.doc
circumstances, the applicants deserve an opportunity to go
ahead with the land acquisition reference applications.
7. He further refers to quite a few orders which have
been passed by this court in similar circumstances.
8. Learned counsel for applicants, on instructions, fairly
states that his clients would not claim interest for the
period from the date of dismissal of their land acquisition
references till their appearance before the land acquisition
reference court pursuant to this order, further stating that
they would give evidence in right earnest.
9. In view of aforesaid, impugned orders are set aside.
The land acquisition references are restored to their
position as had been subsisting just before the dismissal
order. The land acquisition references stand restored and
may be disposed of within a period of six months. The
applicants to appear before the land acquisition reference
court on 25-11-2016. It may be noted, the applicants have
waived interest for the period from the date of rejection of
land acquisition references to the date of their appearance
before reference court i.e. 25-11-2016.
7 CRA-116.16.doc
10. The applicants - claimants shall deposit Rs. 2,500/-
before the land acquisition reference court towards costs to
be paid to respondent - State in each of the land
acquisition references. Costs shall be deposited in the land
acquisition reference court before 30-11-2016.
11. Rule made absolute in aforesaid terms. Civil revision
applications stand disposed of.
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH,
JUDGE
pnd
