Bombay High Court
Jivraj Harilal Devda vs Ganesh Mohan Sonavane And Anr on 4 October, 2024
Author: G.S. Kulkarni
Bench: G.S. Kulkarni
2024:BHC-AS:40656-DB
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 13497 OF 2024
1. Ganesh Mohan Sonavane
Digitally
signed by
SHRADDHA
2. Sonal Viju Dodake (after marriage name)
SHRADDHA KAMLESH
KAMLESH TALEKAR
TALEKAR Date:
(Sonal Mohan Sonavane) .. Petitioners
2024.10.14
18:55:06
+0530
Versus
1. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Panvel, Acting as Land Acquisition Officer
2. Smt. Savita Kumari Chopra
3. Jyoti Kashinath Vairagar
4. State of Maharashtra
5. Bipin Trilokchand Kothari
6. Smt. Sunanda Subhash Kothari
7. Mukund Namdeorao Hatote
8. Avinash Tukaram Sanas ..Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13528 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 13497 OF 2024
1. Mr. Ramakant Rajaram Godse,
2. Mrs. Santosh Subhash Singh
3. Mr. Ankush Sitaram Jadhaw
4. Mr. Hitesh Vitthal Bhopi ...Applicants
In the matter between :
1. Shri Ganesh Sonavane
2. Sonal Viju Dodake (after marriage name) (Sonal
Mohan Sonavane) ...Petitioners
Versus
1. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Panvel, Acting as Land Acquisition Officer & Ors. ...Respondents
Page 1 of 9
October 4, 2024
::: Uploaded on - 14/10/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2024 04:13:35 :::
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13530 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 13497 OF 2024
1. Jivraj Harilal Devda .. Applicants/
Intervenors
2. Mr. Rohit Ramchandra Patil
In the matter between :
1. Shri Ganesh Sonavane
2. Sonal Viju Dodake (after marriage name)
(Sonal Mohan Sonavane) ...Petitioners
Versus
1. The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Panvel, Acting as Land Acquisition Officer & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Vijay Killedar, for Petitioners.
Mr. Shardul Singh a/w. Ms. Sayali Sawant, for Applicants.
Ms. M.S. Bane, AGP for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni i/b Akshay Kulkarni, for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Y.S. Jahagirdar, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Suresh Sabrad, Mr.
Jeethendra Sachhdev, Mr. Amey Sawant, Ms. Gracy Saldanha, Mr.
Abubakar Patel and Pratik Sabrad i/b JS Legal, for respondent Nos. 5
and 6.
CORAM : G.S. KULKARNI &
SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, JJ.
Date : October 4, 2024
Oral Judgement (Per, Somasekhar Sundaresan J.):
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned Counsel for the
Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, heard finally.
2. This Writ Petition essentially seeks a direction to quash and set aside
a decision dated February 2, 2024 by the Land Acquisition Officer not to refer
the disputes raised by the Petitioners in connection with apportionment of
compensation for land acquired for purposes of a State Highway, to the
Reference Court / Authority under Section 19C(4) of the Maharashtra
Highways Act, 1955 ("the Act"). Interim Application No. 13528 of 2024 and
Interim Application No. 13530 of 2024, are applications for intervention by
other landowners who had acquired rights in the land from the parties against
whom the Petitioners claim, some portion of the land now acquired by the Land
Acquisition Officer, seeking to be heard before this Petition is adjudicated.
3. The Petitioners claim that various parcels of land listed in Paragraph
No.4 of the Petition represent properties in which they have an interest by
reason of inheritance. The said properties were originally owned by one Mr.
Ganesh Oze, on whose demise on January 20, 1945, two daughters and a widow
became entitled to the properties. The Petitioners claim through one such
daughter. According to the Petitioners, the maternal grandmother, namely,
Mrs. Shardabai Ganesh Oze had executed a will dated December 31, 2010 in
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
the erroneous belief that she was the exclusive owner of all the properties in
question, to bequeath the properties in favour of Respondent No.2, the other
daughter.
4. According to the Petitioners, their mother passed away on March, 22,
2013, while their grandmother who wrote the will passed away on September
22, 2014. It is on the basis of the said will that the names of the Respondents
came to be mutated in the record of rights vide various mutation entries relating
to the subject properties. Ten separate appeals under the Maharashtra Land
Revenue Code, 1966 ("MLRC") were preferred challenging the mutation
entries resulting in the mutation entries being set aside by judgment and order
dated July 24, 2017 passed by a Sub-Divisional Officer, Panvel in RTS Appeal
No. 136 to 146 of 2016. Second appeals under the MLRC led to the quashing
of the mutation entries being upheld vide orders dated January 20, 2020.
Revision applications before the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division too
came to be dismissed on January 10, 2022. A second revision under the MLRC
before the Revenue Minister came to be allowed on June 8, 2022, thereby
reinstating the mutation entries. A review application of the Revenue Minister's
decision, with an application for condonation of delay of five days is pending.
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
5. The Petitioners also submit that proceedings between the Petitioners and
the second daughter of Mr. Ganesh Oze, namely, Savita Kumari Chopra,
Respondent No.2 are pending before the Civil Court, Panvel. Proceedings for
grant of probate had been taken out leading to a probate certificate being
granted on August 19, 2017. Proceedings for revocation of the probate
certificate have been filed by the Petitioners and are pending till date. Likewise,
Regular Civil Suit No. 82 of 2018 has been filed by Respondent No.2 seeking
declaration of ownership of the subject properties, on the basis of the probate,
pursuant to the will dated December 31, 2010, and is pending. The Petitioners
have filed a counter-claim, also seeking declaration in connection with the
properties.
6. These properties include the land parcels that were acquired under the
Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955 for purposes of the Virar-Alibaug Multimodal
Corridor Highway, a State Highway.
7. The Petitioners have contended before the Land Acquisition authorities
that they are entitled to 50% of the compensation payable in respect of the land
so acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer, Respondent No.1, rejected the
objections raised by the Petitioners vide their representations dated September
15, 2023 and September 25, 2023 holding that without sufficient documentary
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
evidence, the Petitioners had not made out a case for grant of any relief. The
orders rejecting the objections came to be passed on February 2, 2024, which
are the orders impugned in the present Petition.
8. This Division Bench disposed of Writ Petition filed by a Company called
U.S. Infra Housing Pvt. Ltd. through an "authorised person" 1, wherein without
examining the merits of rival contentions, the Petitioner was granted liberty to
move an application before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Panvel along with all
relevant material to make out a claim, if any, in respect of land acquisition. So
also, the Petitioners had also moved Writ Petition No. 6285 of 2024 which also
came to be disposed of as withdrawn allowing the Petitioners to file a fresh and
proper petition, granting ad-interim protection against not disturbing the
compensation amount for a period of 15 days. Pursuant to such liberty, the
present Petition has been filed. Such protection has continued till date.
9. We have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and have examined the
record with their assistance. Section 19C(3) of the Act indeed provides that
where several persons claim to be interested in the amount deposited in respect
of the land acquired, the Land Acquisition Officer shall determine the persons,
who in his opinion, are entitled to receive the amount payable to each of them.
Writ Petition No. 12658 of 2024 dated September 19, 2024 (U.S. Infra Housing Pvt.
Ltd. Vs. Sub-Divisional Officer, Panvel & 3 Ors.)
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
Section 19C(4) of the Act provides that if any dispute arises, as to
apportionment of such amount or any part of such amount, the Land
Acquisition Officer shall refer the dispute to the principal Civil Court of original
jurisdiction in the place where the land is situated. In the case at hand, in our
opinion, once again, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it
is evident and writ large on the face of the record, that there is a dispute among
the parties over ownership and title to the land acquired for the purposes of the
State Highway. Various strands of the dispute are at various stages before
various fora. Suffice it to say that disputes indeed exist and are pending, among
the parties.
10. Evidently, there is a dispute over entitlement to the properties in
question. The entitlements claimed may be with or without merit, but that
position would be determined in the outcome of the proceedings involved in the
dispute. The dispute over entitlements, necessarily translates into a
consequential dispute over apportionment of the compensation amount.
Therefore, we are of the view that the appropriate course of action that the Land
Acquisition Officer, Respondent No.1 ought to have taken, was to make a
reference of such dispute to the jurisdictional Civil Court. Since such reference
has not been made, we are of the view, without expression of any opinion on the
merits of the matter, that it would only be proper to direct Respondent No.1 to
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
make a reference of the dispute over apportionment of compensation to the
Civil Court having territorial jurisdiction over the lands in question, under
intimation to the Petitioners and all the other Respondents, including the
intervenors. The intervenors in this Writ Petition are at liberty to adopt such
proceedings as advised before the Civil Court.
11. The Respondents claiming through the other daughter and under the
will of the grandmother have submitted that the Petitioners are only claiming
50% of the compensation amount and therefore, they ought to be permitted to
withdraw the undisputed portion of their compensation. The intervenors have
submitted that their purchase is bona fide and for value and there should be no
dispute over their portion of the compensation due pursuant to the land
acquisition. These parties are at liberty to make an appropriate application to
that effect for withdrawal of an undisputed compensation, if any, and make all
such submissions before the jurisdictional Civil Court to which the reference is
being made. The Civil Court may pass appropriate orders as the facts,
circumstances and equities, warrant. In exercise of our writ jurisdiction, we do
not believe it is appropriate to pronounce upon such facets of the matter, when
the law has conferred jurisdiction on the Civil Court to which reference is to be
made. All contentions of all parties are kept open for adjudication by the Civil
Court. We have restricted ourselves to answering the question of whether the
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
AS-WP-13497-2024=IA-F.docx
Land Acquisition Officer, Respondent No. 1 was right in refusing to refer the
matter to the Civil Court, which it was incumbent on him to do.
12. Since ad-interim relief came to be granted on this Petition, liberty is
given to the Petitioners to take out an interim application before the Civil Court
in question, within a period of two weeks from the reference to the Civil Court,
being intimated to them. The interim relief currently in place shall continue
until disposal of such application for interim relief, if any, that may be filed
before the Civil Court. If the Petitioners do not obtain any interim relief from
the Civil Court before the expiry of four weeks from the date of filing such
interim application, the protection being by this Court would stand vacated.
13. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. The Writ Petition is
disposed of. No costs.
14. As a result, any other interim/civil application relating to this Petition too
is hereby finally disposed of.
[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.] [G.S. KULKARNI, J.]
October 4, 2024
Shraddha Talekar, PS
