Bhiva Aaba Tambe vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 15677 Bom

                                                                914-fa-2944-2019.odt




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          FIRST APPEAL NO. 2944 OF 2019

 Bhiva Aaba Tambe                                      ... Appellant
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                              ... Respondent

                                      AND
                          FIRST APPEAL NO. 3547 OF 2018

 Shivaji Aba Tambe (Died)Through His LRs.,
 1. Smt. Kamal Shivaji Tambe and others                ... Appellants
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                              ... Respondent

                                      AND
                          FIRST APPEAL NO. 3549 OF 2018

 Vaijinath Baliram Tambe (Died)
 Through His LRs.,
 1. Smt. Shobha Vaijinath Tambe and others             ... Appellants
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                              ... Respondent
                                  ....
 Mr. A. R. Barate, Advocate for appellants
 Mr. S. N. Morampalle, AGP for the State
                                  ....

                                    CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT, J.

DATED : 29th OCTOBER, 2021

PER COURT :-

 .                Heard.



                                                                         1 of 3





                                        (( 2 ))                  914-fa-2944-2019

2. The challenge in these appeals is to the judgment and

order dismissing the Land Acquisition References on the ground of

having not been filed within limitation.

3. Learned Advocate for the appellant has brought to the

notice of this Court the document Exhibit-A at page No.7 of First

Appeal No.2944 of 2019, wherein Clause 4 indicates that notice

under Section 12(2) of the Act was served on the appellant -

claimant on 07.01.1998. While, the Reference was filed on

13.02.1998 i.e. well within limitation.

4. The Reference Court ought to have taken into

consideration the date on which the copy of the award was served to

the appellant - claimant. As such, the Reference Court had erred in

dismissing L.A.Rs on the ground of limitation.

5. In the circumstances, the appeals are allowed. The

impugned judgment and awards are set aside. The matters are

remanded back to the Reference Court for deciding it afresh without

reference to the issue of limitation.

                                                                                   2 of 3





                                       (( 3 ))                  914-fa-2944-2019

6. It appears that the Acquiring Body has not been made

party to these appeals. Liberty to add.

7. The appellants, however, shall not be entitled for

component of interest for the period from the date of impugned

order/award to the date of this order.

[ R. G. AVACHAT, J. ]

SMS

3 of 3