1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH NAGPUR First Appeal No.256/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Fakira Punja Mongare aged about 63 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS ..... First Appeal No.230/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Wasudeo Kawadu Nikode aged about 40 years, Occu. Agriculturist 2 resident of Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.584/2002 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Narayan Kawdu Jumnake aged about 40 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.204/2003 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Ganpat Kawdu Warkhede aged about 41 years, 3 Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.205/2003 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Ashok V. Tangadpalliwar aged about 50 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.236/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 4 1. Shri Tulsiram Ade aged about 65 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.237/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Rajaram Narayanrao Chaudhari aged about 52 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Chimda, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.249/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, 5 Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Vithal Sonu Wakudkar aged about 45 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Marhegaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.271/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Mohammad Ibrahim Mohammad Yusuf, Since dead through his L.Rs. 1-A Mohammad Salim s/o Mohammad Ibrahim aged about 30 years, 1-B Saida Khatun wd/ Mohammad Ibrahim aged about 50 years, 1-C Mohammad Taslim s/o Mohammad Ibrahim aged about 35 years, all resident of Mul, 6 District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.272/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Ako Sitaram Choudhari aged about 55 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Tekadi, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.307/2001 Maharashtra Ind5ustrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Dashrath Pendor aged about 45 years, 7 Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.323/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Dadaji Punjaram Ladawe, aged about 60 years, Occu. Agriculturist 2. Namdeo Punjaram Ladawe Aged about 50 years, Occu. Agriculturist 3. Mrs. Sakhubai Vithal Choudhari Aged about 60 years, Occ. Nil. 1 to 3 are resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 4. Anjanabai Tulshiram Parate Aged about 60 years, Occ : Wagholi, Tahsil Chamorshi District Gadchiroli. 8 5. Yashodabai Pandurang Zate Aged about years Resident of Mul, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 6. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.334/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Vasant Parsuram Dhole SINCE DEAD THROUGH HIS L.R's 2. Smt. Dhurpatabai wd/o Vasant Dhole aged about 55 years, Occupation Agriculturist. 3. Kushal Vasant Dhole aged about 27 years, Occupation Agriculturist. 4. Gurudas Vasant Dhole aged about 25 years, Occupation Agriculturist. 2 to 4 resident of Tekadi, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 5. The State of Maharashtra, 9 Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.354/2001 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Shri Bhaurao Narayan Tangadpalliwar aged about 56 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.514/2002 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Ramdas Shrawan Gurnunale aged about 49 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, 10 District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.534/2002 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Pandurang Shivram Ladawe aged about 70 years, Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS First Appeal No.545/2002 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation through its Regional Officer Udyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Narayan Asuji Chitade aged about 60 years, 11 Occu. Agriculturist resident of Maregaon, Tahsil Mul, District Chandrapur. 2. The State of Maharashtra, Through The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandrapur. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr.M. M. Agnihotri, Advocate for the appellant - MIDC. Mr. A. R. Patil and Mrs. U.A. Patil, Advocates for claimant(s)- respondents in all appeals. Mr. Deopujari, AGP for State of Maharashtra-respondents in all appeals. .... Coram : A.P. LAVANDE, J . Dated : September 14, 2006 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1 All these appeals are being disposed of by common judgment since common questions of fact and law are involved in all these appeals. 2 State of Maharashtra acquired lands belonging to several 12 persons, including those of the respondents in the present appeals for the benefit of Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “The Corporation”) under the provisions of Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Aggrieved by the compensation fixed by the Collector, the land owners filed the application under Section 34 of the Act claiming higher compensation. In all the references the State of Maharashtra was was made party. The Corporation was not joined as party in the references. The Court, after considering the evidence led by the claimants and State of Maharashtra enhanced the compensation. Aggrieved by the judgments and orders passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandrapur in several Land Acquisition References, the Corporation has filed above appeals. The details of the said References are as under:- F.A. No. LAC No. Date of Judgment 256/2001 28/1995 15/11/2000 230/2001 17/1995 15/11/2000 584/2002 41/1995 30/04/2001 204/2003 39/1995 30/04/2001 205/2003 29/1995 30/04/2001 236/2001 22/1995 09/10/2000 237/2001 20/1995 15/11/2000 13 249/2001 38/1995 21/10/2000 271/2001 23/1995 21/11/2000 272/2001 42/1995 21/10/2000 307/2001 26/1995 15/11/2000 323/2001 15/1995 15/11/2000 334/2001 19/1995 15/11/2000 354/2001 16/1995 15/11/2000 514/2001 33/1995 30/04/2001 534/2002 43/1995 30/04/2001 545/2002 27/1995 20/04/2001 3 I have heard Mr. Agnihotri, learned counsel on behalf of the appellant-Corporation, Mr. Deopujari, learned AGP for the respondent-State of Maharashtra, and Mr. and Ms. Patil, learned counsel for the claimants/respondents. 4. Mr. Agnihotri, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submitted that impugned judgments and orders are liable to be set aside on the ground that although the acquisition of lands belonging to the respondents/claimants was made for the benefit of the Corporation and consequently, it is the responsibility of the Corporation to pay enhanced compensation, the Corporation was not made a party before the Reference Court. According to Mr. Agnihotri, the Corporation was necessary party before the Reference Court and therefore, the judgments and orders passed by the 14 Reference Court are vitiated. According to Mr. Agnihotri, all the impugned judgments and orders are liable to be set aside and the matters remanded back to the Reference Court for dealing with the matters in the light of the directions given by the Apex Court in several judgments. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel relied upon the following judgments:- (i) AIR 1995 Supreme Court 724 (U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad V. Gyan Devi (Dead) by L.Rs. and another). (ii) AIR 2002 Supreme Court 817 (Abdul Rasak and others Vs. Kerala Water Authority and others). (iii) (2004) 12 Supreme Court Cases 96 (NTPC Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and others). 5 Mr. Deopujari, learned AGP supported the submissions made by Mr. Agnihotri, learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation in all the appeals. In view of the ratio laid down by the Apex court in various judgments, learned counsel appearing for the respondents- claimants could not seriously support the impugned judgments and orders. 6 In U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad's case (supra) the 15 Constitution Bench of the Apex Court held that when the land is acquired for local authority or company, the authority or local company as the case may be is a proper party in the proceedings before the Reference Court and is entitled to be impleaded as a party in those proceedings wherein it can defend the determination of the amount of compensation by the Collector and oppose enhancement of the said amount and also adduce evidence in this regard. In Abdul Rasak's case (supra) the Apex Court after referring to the above referred Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court gave certain directions. In NTPC Ltd's case (supra) the Apex Court held that body on whose behalf land is acquired is necessary and proper party and therefore entitled to be impleaded in proceedings before Reference Court and in case body on whose behalf land is acquired is not jointed before the Reference Court, award passed in its absence is liable to be set aside and the matter remanded back to the Reference Court. 7 In view of clear ratio laid down by the Constitution Bench of 16 the Apex court and the other judgments of the Apex Court relied upon by the appellant to the effect that body for whose benefit the land is acquired is necessary party before the Reference Court, the impugned judgments and orders are liable to be set aside. Consequently, the judgments and orders passed by the Reference Court, the details of which are given in paragraph 2 above, are set aside with the following directions:- (1) The Corporation shall be deemed to have been brought on record in the reference cases as defendant-non-applicant as the case may be. The cause title of the reference cases shall be amended accordingly. The Corporation is at liberty to file its written statement. (2) The statement of the witnesses already recorded on behalf of the claimants need not be recorded afresh. (3) The Corporation shall be allowed an opportunity of cross- examining the witnesses which have already been examined. However, such of the witnesses as are not available, and, therefore, cannot be called before the Court, their statements shall not be excluded from consideration and shall be read in evidence. 17 (4) The claimants may adduce such other evidence as they may propose to do and State of Maharashtra and Corporation shall have the liberty to cross-examining such witnesses who are now examined by the claimants. (5) The Corporation shall have the liberty of adducing such evidence as it may propose to do. (6) The Corporation shall not be entitled to a separate notice of the proceedings since the parties are represented by counsel. They are directed to appear before the Reference Court on 1st November, 2006 at 11.00 a.m. either personally or through their advocates. (7) Since the lands of the claimants were acquired more than a decade ago, the Civil Court shall decide the References expeditiously and preferably within a period of one years from the date of receipt of this order. 8 The next question which arises for consideration is what order should be passed in relation to the amounts deposited by the appellants in these appeals pursuant to the orders passed upon the applications for stay filed by the Corporation. Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that in few matters the amounts were 18 withdrawn by the claimants upon giving security but in most of the matters the same have been invested. In those cases in which the amounts have not been withdrawn by the claimants, needless to mention that the Corporation shall be entitled to get back the amounts deposited by them in the appeals with interest thereon if the amounts have been invested in bank. In those cases in which the claimants-respondents have withdrawn the amounts upon giving security, they shall deposit the amounts received by them in this Court within a period of eight weeks and the Corporation shall be entitled to withdraw the same. 9. The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs. Registry to send the records and proceedings in all the appeals to the Reference Court expeditiously. JUDGE