Bombay High Court
Kakasaheb Gahenaji Sonune And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 1 March, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:4696
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
982 WRIT PETITION NO. 13469 OF 2023
JANARDHAN RANGNATH BOKAN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR JALNA AND
OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. D. A. Mane h/f Pingale Durgesh M
AGP for Respondents-State : Mrs. P. R.Bharaswadkar
...
AND
983 WRIT PETITION NO. 13476 OF 2023
KAKASAHEB GAHENAJI SONUNE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR JALNA AND
OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Pingale Durgesh M
AGP for Respondents: Mr. V. M. Chate
...
AND
984 WRIT PETITION NO. 13477 OF 2023
BHASKAR FAKIRBA SONUNE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Pingale Durgesh M
AGP for Respondents: Mrs. K. R. Jamdhade
...
AND
985 WRIT PETITION NO. 13478 OF 2023
TUKARAM RAMA ALIAS RAMRAO DHANURE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR JALNA AND
OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Pingale Durgesh M
AGP for Respondents: Mr. V. M. Chate
...
2 982 WP 13469-2023
AND
986 WRIT PETITION NO. 13479 OF 2023
NARAYAN BHAGWANTA SHINDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR AURANGABAD
AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Pingale Durgesh M
AGP for Respondents: Mrs. P. R. Bharaswadkar
...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Dated : March 01, 2024
PER COURT :-
1. Heard.
2. Mr. D. A. Mane holding for Mr. D. M. Pingale, the learned counsel
for the petitioners submits that the LAR No.2087/2010 (decided on
23/07/2014), LAR No.73/2012 ( decided on 05/12/2018), LAR
No.396/2012 ( decided on 06/12/2018), LAR No.2105/2010 ( decided
on 30/10/2012) and LAR No.752/1997 ( decided on 12/08/2013) were
dismissed, on account of non leading of evidence. He relies upon the
Judgment of this court in Writ Petition Nos.2973/2023, 12795/2019,
8823/2021 and 3992/2021, dated 15/03/2023, 17/01/2020,
27/06/2022 and 03/03/2021 respectively, and submits that wherever
evidence is not led by the parties this court has remitted the matter
3 982 WP 13469-2023
back with liberty to lead evidence holding that the reference court has
to decide the reference on merits and not to dismiss the same on
account of non leading of evidence of the claimants.
3. The learned AGP does not disputes the proposition of law that
where the evidence is not led by the parties this court has remitted the
matter back as mentioned in the above in Writ Petition Nos.2973/2023,
12795/2019, 8823/2021 and 3992/2021, dated 15/03/2023,
17/01/2020, 27/06/2022 and 03/03/2021 respectively. However,
submits that there is a huge delay in approaching this court and the
orders dated 23/07/2014, 05/12/2018, 06/12/2018, 30/10/2012 and
12/08/2013 are challenged in the present writ petitions.
4. In response to the submissions of the leaned AGP, the learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would not claim
any interest or statutory benefit for the delayed period from the date of
the dismissal of the reference i.e. 23/07/2014 in LAR No.2087/2010,
05/12/2018 in LAR No.73/2012, 06/12/2018 in LAR No.396/2012,
30/10/2012 in LAR No.2105/2010 and 12/08/2013 in LAR
No.752/1997, till the date of the filing of these petitions i.e.
02/08/2023, 21/08/2023, 21/08/2023, 01/08/2023 and 14/07/2023
respectively.
5. In view of the submission made, the award of the reference court
4 982 WP 13469-2023
is set aside and the matters are remitted back to the reference court to
decide it in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the petitioners would remain present before the reference
court, on 20/03/2024 and will lead evidence as per the date given by
the reference court. The reference court to decide the reference as
expeditiously as possible and in any event within one (01) year from
the date of production of this order. In the event, the reference court
answers the reference in favour of the claimants, the claimants would
not be entitled for the interest and statutory benefits from the date of
decision of their LARs till filing of the writ petitions, as mentioned
above.
6. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.
( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. )
vj gawade/-.
