1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10156 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 634 OF 2003 Trimbakrao Narharrao Deshpande ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondent ..... Mr. Prashant Deshmukh, Advocate, for the applicant Mr. S.P. Daund, AGP, for the respondent Mr. R.V. Naiknavare, advocate for respondents 2 to 5 ..... CORAM: S. B. DESHMUKH AND S. S. SHINDE, JJ. DATED: 8TH JULY 2009 PER COURT :- 1 Heard learned counsel Mr. Deshmukh for the applicant, learned A.G.P. Mr. Daund for respondent No.1 State and Mr. Naiknavare for respondent Nos. 2 to 5. 2. The applicant Trimbakrao, seeks himself to be added as respondent in first appeal No. 634 of 2003 pending in this Court. For reference, resume of some admitted facts is necessary. Mr. Tukaram Sherkar, Mr. Raosaheb Bandu Deshmukh and Mr. Digambar Trimbakrao Tirathkar had filed 2 application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation regarding their acquired agricultural lands situated at village Devlali, Tq and District Osmanabad. The said application was preferred before the learned District Judge at Osmanabad, who in turn forwarded it to the learned C.J.S.D. Osmanabad. The said application was registered as Land Acquisition Reference No. 110 of 1994. This L.A.R. No.110 of 1994 has been decided by the learned C.J.S.D. by his judgment and award passed on 22.3.1995. The learned C.J.S.D. (Reference Court) allowed the application partly and claimants in that application, it was held, are entitled to receive enhanced amount of compensation @ Rs.6/- (Rupees Six) per sq. ft. for their acquired portion of land and the Reference Court has awarded compensation of Rs. 4,37,778/-. The Reference Court has also held that the claimants in that Land Acquisition Reference are entitled to receive amount of Rs.90,000/- for well and Rs.60,000/- for another well. Apart from this, other benefits were also provided by the learned Reference Court by judgment delivered on 22.3.1995. 3 The State of Maharashtra, being aggrieved by this judgment and award, enhancing the amount of compensation, filed this appeal i.e. First Appeal No. 634 of 2004. This appeal was taken up for admission before this Court on 25.4.2003 and after hearing, learned AGP and advocate Mr. R.V. Naiknavare for respondents, appeal was admitted. Print of paper book was 3 dispensed with. Statement of learned AGP was recorded and further direction was given for listing the appeal for final hearing in the week from 28.7.2003. 4 While parting with this part of the order, we have noticed that the present applicant, in this civil application, Mr. Trimbakrao Narharrao Deshpande was not party to L.A.R. No. 110 of 1994. The present applicant Mr. Trimbakrao Deshpande, on this background, by this application seeks addition of himself as respondent in the first appeal. On our query, Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel submits that Sau. Sumanbai w/o Trimbakrao Deshpande had filed writ petition No.3168 of 2006 in this Court. There is no submission made in this civil application regarding filing of writ petition No. 3168 of 2006 by Sau. Sumanbai w/o Trimbakrao Deshpande i.e. wife of present applicant. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the applicant, however, made available xerox copy of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 6.6.2006 in writ petition No. 3168 of 2006. The said copy is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. One copy of the said order was made available to Advocate Mr. Naiknaare for perusal. Mr. Naiknavare has perused the copy of the said order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court. According to learned counsel Mr. Deshmukh, he is entitled to be added as respondent in the first appeal. Addition of person to the suit either plaintiff or defendant is a matter governed under Rule 10(2) of Oder I of Code of Civil Procedure 1908. It is laid down that he/she should be necessary party 4 and/or proper party. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel, relying on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 3168 of 2006 submits that present applicant needs to be joined as party respondent. 5 We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. In our view, considering the submissions made in the present civil application, it is not possible for us to allow civil application i.e. addition of the present applicant as party respondent to the appeal. However, we are not entering into the area of order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No.3168 of 2006. As there is no pleading so far as the said petition, in this civil application. In para 5 of the order the learned Division Bench has stated that, “In view of the factual circumstances as above, petitioner shall have liberty to move the High Court for early disposal of the appeal.” We have not touched to this part of the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 3168 of 2006 meaning thereby the said order stands as it is. 6. This civil application stands dismissed. *****