[email protected] Ajilu Sarwade (Died) ... vs The State Of Maharshtra And Anr
2018 Latest Caselaw 986 Bom

                                      {1}
                                                                  fa135.13.odt

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 135 OF 2013
                                 
 Limbu @ Limba Antu Sarwade
 (Died) through LRs

 Kishan Limba Sarwade
 (Died) through LRs

 1-A) Nilabai Kishan Sarwade
      age 55 years, occ. agri.
      r/o Harangul (Bk)
      Tq. & Dist. Latur.

 1-B) Balaji Kishan Sarwade
      age 50 years, occ.agril
      r/o Harangul (Bk)
      Tq. & Dist. Latur.

 1-C) Chandrakant Kishan Sarwade
      age 45 years, occ. agril
      r/o Harangul (Bk)
      Tq. & Dist. Latur.

 1-D) Sanjay Kishan Sarwade
      age 43 years, occ.agril
      r/o Harangul (Bk)
      Tq. & Dist. Latur.

 2        Ram Limba Sarwade
          age 67 years, occ. agril.
          r/o Harangul (Bk)
          Tq. & Dist. Latur.

 3        Hari Limba Sarwade
          age 65 years, occ. agril
          r/o Harangul (Bk)
          Tq. & Dist. Latur.

 4        Sopan Limba Sarwade
          age 62 years, occ. agril
          r/o Harangul (Bk)




::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2018                ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2018 01:22:50 :::
                                           {2}
                                                                          fa135.13.odt

          Tq. & Dist. Latur.                                          Appellants

          Versus

 1        The State of Maharashtra
          Through its Collector, Latur

 2        Maharashtra Industrial Development
          Corporation
          Through Regional Manager
          Latur.                                                      Respondents

 Mr. S.V. Gundre, advocate for appellants.
 Mr. B.V. Virdhe, AGP for respondent no. 1.
 Mr. S.S. Dande, advocate for respondent no.2. 
  
  
                                 CORAM : M.S. SONAK, J.

                                DATE     : 25th JANUARY, 2018

 ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing, since, it is stated that this appeal is infact, one out of the group of appeals i.e. First Appeal No. 484/2010 and connected matters. It is pointed out that this appeal was instituted after some delay and the delay is condoned.

3. This Court, by order dated 7th April, 2014, disposed of First Appeal No 484/2010 and connected matters, by making following order :-

1. Heard both sides.

2. Arising out of same acquisition proceeding, some of the appeals are filed by the acquiring body i.e.

{3} fa135.13.odt

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, aggrieved by the enhancement in the compensation awarded by the learned reference court while in some of the appeals, the claimants have come before this Court seeking enhancement in the awarded amount.

3. During the hearing of the present reference applications, both sides submit that as both the sides have filed additional documents, which would go o the root of the issues involved, the matters may be remitted back to the learned trial Court. They further submit that as the acquisition is very old one, the learned trial Court may be requested for expeditious hearing of the same.

4. In the circumstances, the following order :-

I) The impugned awards are quashed and set aside.

II) The matters are remitted back to the learned reference Court, with a direction to decide the reference applications afresh by allowing the parties to file additional documents/evidence.

III) Both the parties submit that they would not seek any unnecessary adjournments.

IV) Learned reference Court is requested to expedite the hearing and take efforts for decision within a period of six (6) months from today, specifically considering that the appellant in FA/2879/2009 is 78 years old and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India had earlier requested this Court to expedite the hearing of the appeal.

V) 50% of the amount is already withdrawn by the respondents-claimants. The same shall be subject to the awards passed by the reference Court.

VI) Parties to appear in the reference Court on 3rd May, 2014.

VII) R & P be remitted to the reference Court

{4} fa135.13.odt

forthwith.

5. With these directions, the First Appeals are disposed of.

6. In view of the disposal of First Appeals, CA/10886/2013, CA/3453/2014, CA/1128/2012 and CA/2789/2014 also stand disposed of.

4. In the present case also, the appellants produced the very same document and seek the very same order for remand. Infact, learned counsel for the appellants points out that the reference Court has already enhanced compensation from Rs. 9/- per sq. ft. to Rs. 14/- per sq. ft.

5. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of by allowing the parties to file additional documents, with the following order :-

I) The impugned award is quashed and set aside.

II) The matter is remitted back to the learned reference Court, with a direction to decide the reference application afresh by allowing the parties to file additional documents/evidence.

III) Both the parties submit that they would not seek any unnecessary adjournments.

IV) Reference Court is directed to dispose of the reference within six months from the date of production of authenticated copy of this order.

{5} fa135.13.odt

V) Parties to appear before the Reference Court on 12th February, 2018, and produce authenticated copy of this order.

V) Record and Proceeding be remanded to the Reference Court forthwith.

6. Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of.

( M.S. SONAK, J. )

dyb