Jayram Hiraji Tandel vs Janardan Fakir Alias Devram ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11045 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:32095
                                                                                          47-wp10955-2023.doc


                             VRJ
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                   WRIT PETITION NO.10955 OF 2023


                             Jayaram Hiraji Tandel                          ... Petitioner
               Digitally
               signed by
               VAIBHAV
        VAIBHAV RAMESH
                                        V/s.
        RAMESH JADHAV
        JADHAV Date:
               2023.10.25
               18:53:18
               +0530
                             Janardan Fakir Alias Devram Mhatre &
                             Ors.                                           ... Respondent


                             Mr. Rohit D. Joshi for the petitioner.
                             Mr. Shriram S. Kulkarni i/by Mr. Saurabh D. Butala for
                             the respondents.



                                                            CORAM     : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                            DATED     : OCTOBER 25, 2023
                             P.C.:

1. Challenge in this petition is to the order passed by the reference Court which decides reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984.

2. It is well settled that the scope of proceedings under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, is restricted challenge to the measurement of the property or the quantum of compensation. Once the reference Court decides the reference, after entertaining application by the claimants, it has no power to adjudicate inter se rights between the claimants and the person who claims to be person interested.

3. In view of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sharda

47-wp10955-2023.doc

Devi vs. State of Bihar and Others reported in 2003 (3) SCC 128, the remedy of such person is to file a substantive suit seeking ventilation of his rights or to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the facts of the case that the petitioner has already filed a suit seeking relief for partition and possession in relation to the properties which were subject matter of land acquisition award. Therefore, proper remedy to the petitioner was to file an application before the Court where substantive proceeding for partition is pending.

4. Since the reference Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act has no power to decide rights of a person claiming to be interested, the impugned order does not suffer from legal infirmity.

5. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)