1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.794 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra ....Appellant V/s. Anand P. Bhoir ....Respondent Mrs.G.P. Mulekar, A.G.P. for the Appellant. Mr.Sachin S. Punde for Respondent No.1. Mr.A.N. Samant for the Respondent – Railway. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ. DATE : 1ST JULY, 2009. P.C. :- 1. This Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 arises from the award dated 17.7.2007 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) at Alibag in L.A.R. No.1038 of 2000 (Old No. 74 of 1997). By the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 4.9.1995, the land of Respondent No.1 admeasuring about 45.3-R from Hissa No.2, Survey No.8 of village Chowk Manivali, Taluka Khalapur, District Raigad was acquired for the project of Panvel- Karjat Railway line. It is thus clear that the land was acquired for the central railway and a copy of the notification issued under Section 4 of the said Act which has been placed on record by Mrs.Mulekar, the 2 learned A.G.P. clearly indicates that the State Government acquired the land for the central railway. 2. However, the claimant – land owner filed an application for enhanced compensation under Section 18 of the said Act and the same was referred to the Reference Court, no steps were taken to implead the Central Railway as an additional Respondent in the claim that at no point of time no officer of the central railway or the notice or suo-motu appeared before the Reference Court and cross- examined the witnesses of the claimant so as to oppose the reference. It is well settled by now that the body for whom the land is acquired and such a body is other than any department of the Government of Maharashtra, the said body is required to be a necessary party before the Reference Court so as to contest the application for enhancement of compensation. In the instant case, he central railways have been deprived of their right to oppose the application either by filing a reply and examining the witnesses or even by cross-examining the witnesses of the claimant and therefore, it is necessary to remand the reference application for its fresh adjudication after adding present Respondent No.2 and 2-A as an additional Respondents. 3. Hence this Appeal succeeds on this preliminary point and the same is hereby allowed partly. The impugned order is quashed and set-aside and L.A.R. No.1038 of 2000 (Old No.78 of 1997) is hereby restored to the file of the learned Joint Civil Judge (Senior 3 Division), at Alibag for its fresh adjudication after adding present Respondent Nos.2 and 2-A as an additional Respondents. The added Respondents are at liberty to file written statement and adduce evidence as well as to cross-examine the claimant’s witnesses who have been already examined. Undoubtedly the claimant is not deprived of adducing additional evidence, if so desired. 4. It is further directed that on remand, the reference shall be heard and decided as expeditiously as possible preferably before 31.12.2009. The parties to appear before the Reference Court on 15.6.2009. The added Respondents to file their written statement, if so desired, by 31.12.2009. (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)