Bombay High Court
Shaikh Anis Sheikh Bashid vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 25 September, 2017
Bench: S.B. Shukre
CRA114.17.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.114/2017
APPLICANT :- Shaikh Anis Sheikh Bashid,
aged about 50 years, Occ. Agriculturist
R/o Mahagaon, Tahsil Darwha,
District Yavatmal.
...V E R S U S...
NON-APPLICANTS :- 1. State of Maharashtra, through
Collector, Yavatmal.
2. Sub-Divisional Officer and Special
Land Acquisition Officer, Darwha,
Tah. Darwha, District Yavatmal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri V.N. Patre, Advocate for applicant
Ms Ritu Kaliya, AGP for respondents.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- S.B. SHUKRE,
J.
DATED :-
25/09/2017.
CRA114.17.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by
consent of the parties.
2. It is seen from the impugned award that the reference
application has been dismissed only because the applicant failed to
adduce any evidence. It is now well settled that reference
application cannot be finally decided just because the claimant
failed to adduce any evidence and whenever there is failure to
adduce evidence, there is a duty cast upon the reference Court to
consider the facts of the case as are available on record and find
out as to whether or not the market value or the rate determined
by the Land Acquisition Officer on the basis of the available facts is
correct. A useful reference in this regard may be made to the view
taken by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of
Mukund s/o Bhimrao Kalshetti...Versus...State of Maharashtra
and another, reported in 2011 (2) Mh.L.J. 849 which, in turn is
based upon the earlier judgments of this Court in the case of (i)
Kawadu Madhav Bansod..Vs..State of Maharashtra and
another, reported in 2004 (1) Mh.L.J. 980 and (ii) Shri
CRA114.17.odt
Kamalkar s/o Laxman Suryawanshi ..Vs..State of Maharashtra
in Civil Revision Application No.1965/2005. Therefore, I am of
the view that the impugned judgment and order cannot be
sustained in the eye of law.
3. In the result, the civil revision application is allowed.
The impugned judgment and order are quashed and set aside. The
reference application is remitted back to the reference Court for
decision afresh in accordance with law. However, it is made clear
that the revision applicant/claimant shall not be entitled to receive
any interest on the enhanced compensation, if any, for the period
in which there were lapses on his part in adducing evidence and
appearing before the Court and this period is from the date of
framing of issues till the date of impugned judgment and order,
i.e., 11/2/2015. The reference application shall be decided
expeditiously, preferably with three months from the date of
appearance of the parties. Parties shall appear before the reference
Court on 30/10/2017. The claimant shall be permitted to adduce
evidence and so the acquiring body as also the State. Parties shall
cooperate with the Reference Court and no unjustified
CRA114.17.odt
adjournments shall be permitted to be sought by the parties. No
order as to costs.
S. B. SHUKRE, J
joshi
