The State Of Mah & 3 Others vs Akbar Umar Teli Yvt
2017 Latest Caselaw 9404 Bom

                                                1                  Jud.FA 484.04.odt


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                        First Appeal (L.A.) No. 484/2004

 Appellants/Ori. Respondents (On R.A.):-

                               1.          The State of Maharashtra.

                               2.          The Collector, Yavatmal,
                                           Dist. Yavatmal

                               3.          The Special Land Acquisition
                                           Officer (Benefited Zone),
                                           Yavatmal.

                               4.          Sub Divisional Engineer, Vidarbha
                                           Irrigation Development
                                           Corporation,
                                           Arunawati Project, Digras, Tq.
                                           Digras, Dist. Yavatmal.
                                           (amendment as per order
                                           dated 07.12.2017.)

                                       Versus

 Respondent/Ori. Petitioner (On R.A.):-

                                           Shri Akbar Umar Teli,
                                           aged about 55 yrs, Occ.
                                           Cultivator, R/o. Digras,
                                           Tah. Digras, Dist. Yavatmal.



 Shri M. A. Kadu, Assistant Government Pleader for appellants.
 Shri A. Z. Jibhkate, Advocate for respondent.
 ___________________________________________________________________________


                                    CORAM : S. B. SHUKRE, J.

                                    DATE      : 07.12.2017.

 Oral Judgment :

1. Leave to amend so as to add Vidarbha Irrigation

Development Corporation as party-respondent is granted.

2 Jud.FA 484.04.odt

2. This appeal questions legality and correctness of

the order dated 3rd January, 2004 rendered in Land Acquisition

Case No. 66/1994 by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division,

Pusad.

3. The issue involved in this appeal is the same as

involved in First Appeal No. 41/2006 and Cross objection No.

15/2006 which have been decided today by this Court by

remanding back the reference application to the Reference

Court for a decision afresh in the matter. Therefore, this

appeal would have to be decided on the same lines and it is

decided accordingly.

The appeal is allowed by following the judgment

and order in First Appeal No. 41/2006 and following directions

are issued:-

(i) The reference application, is remitted back to the

Reference Court for its decision afresh in

accordance with law from the stage of evidence. It

is made clear that evidence already tendered by the

parties shall be valid and taken into consideration

by the Reference Court. The parties shall be at

liberty to adduce further evidence if they choose to

do so.

(ii) The claimant having been permitted to withdraw

3 Jud.FA 484.04.odt

the decreetal amount on furnishing security/surety

etc. shall be bound by those conditions and shall

also abide by the final decree that will now be

passed afresh by the Reference Court.

(iii) The Reference Court shall allow the VIDC to be

joined as a party-respondent. The amendment in

this regard be carried out within one week from the

date of appearance of the parties.

(iv) The parties to appear before the Reference

Court on 18th December, 2017. The Reference

Court shall dispose of the reference application

within six months from the date of appearance of

the parties before it.

(v) The parties shall cooperate with the Reference

Court without seeking any adjournment except on

the ground of factors beyond their control.

(vi) The costs of appeal shall be borne by the VIDC.

(vii) The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE Gohane