: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.61 OF 2009 Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn.....Appellants V/s. Shankarrao N. Deshmukh & Ors. ....Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.62 OF 2009 Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn.....Appellants V/s. Tulsabai D. Vyavahare & Ors. ....Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.63 OF 2009 Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn.....Appellants V/s. Smt.chandrabhaga M. Vyavahare & Ors. ....Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.64 OF 2009 Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn.....Appellants V/s. Manidkrao D. tanpure & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.G.S. Hegde for the Appellants in all the matters. Mr.P.N. Joshi for Respondent Nos.1-A & 1-C in F.A. Nos.61 of 2009, 62 of 2009 and Respondent Nos.1 to 4 in F.A. No.63 of 2009. Mr.M.S. Karnik for Respondent Nos.1 to 7 in F.A. No.64 of 2009. Mrs.G.P. Mulekar, AGP for the State. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & : 2 : S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ. DATED : 9TH APRIL, 2009. P.C. : 1. All these Appeals filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 arise form a common award dated 29.6.2000 rendered by the learned Joint District Judge at Nasik in L.A.R. Nos.214 of 1993, 215 of 1993, 216 of 1993 and 217 of 1993. 2. The Claimants’ land was acquired by the State Government for the purpose of construction of the S.T. stand and S.T. depot at Deolali in Nasik district. The land was acquired and handed over to the Appellant Corporation and it is the Appellant Corporation who is required to pay the entire amount of compensation. However, before the Reference Court, it was neither impleaded as an additional Respondent or any notice was issued to it to appear as a witness. It is, therefore, submitted by Mr.Hegde that the Corporation is required to be given an opportunity to contest the land references arising from the applications filed under Section 18 of the said Act and a fresh adjudication is required to be done for the enhancement after providing an opportunity to the Corporation to adduce evidence and/or cross-examine the Claimants’ witnesses. : 3 : 3. Reliance has been placed on the decisions in the case of U.P. Awas Even Vikas Parishad v. Dhyan Devi, 1995 (2) SCC 326, in support of the prayer that the impugned award be quashed and set-aside and the reference be restored to file on the Reference Court for deciding the enhancement claimed after affording an opportunity to the Appellant Corporation to lead evidence. Mr.Hegde also relied upon the subsequent decisions in the case of Agra Development Authority v. Special Land Acquisition Officer & Ors., AIR 2001 SC 992 and N.T.P.C. Ltd. v. State of Bihar, 2004 (12) SCC 96. 4. It is not disputed that the Appellant was not impleaded as an additional Respondent, nor was it issued a notice by the Reference Court before the impugned award was passed and therefore, as recorded in our earlier order dated 26.3.2009, the impugned award will have to be quashed and set-aside by restoring the reference applications for a fresh adjudication on the enhancement claim of the land owners. 5. Hence, we allow these Appeals partly and quash and set-aside the impugned common award. L.A.R. Nos.214 of 1993, 215 of 1993, 216 of 1993 and 217 of 1993 are hereby restored to the file of the learned : 4 : Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) at Nashik. On restoration, the Appellants shall be added as Respondent No.2 in the reference Applications and the references shall be decided afresh after giving an opportunity to the acquiring body i.e. the Appellant to adduce evidence and/or to cross-examine the witnesses already examined by the Claimants as well as the State Government. Needless to mention that the Claimant also will have to lead evidence if so required. The parties to appear before the Reference Court on 30.4.2009 at 11.00 a.m. and the reference on restoration shall be decided as expeditiously as possible and in any case by 31.8.2009. 6. We record the undertaking of the parties that they would seek unwarranted adjournments before the Reference Court and go on with the matter as per the date fixed by the Reference Court. 7. The parties to bear their own costs. 8. The writ along with R. & P. to go to the Reference Court forthwith. The interim orders passed by this Court for deposit/withdrawal of the award amount will continue to operate and the withdrawal will be subject to the final out come on remand. : 5 : . Refund of court fees as per rules. (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)