1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.1196 OF 2003. Osmanabad Municipal Council, Osmanabad, Through the Chief Officer. APPELLANT VERSUS 1. Maruti S/o Vishwanath Todkari (Died) Through L.Rs. 1-A) Pramod S/o Maroti Todakari Age : 50 years, Occ : Business, R/o Sanja Road, Sanja Ves, Osmanabad, Tq. & Dist.Osmanabad. 1-B) Virbhadra S/o Maroti Todakari Age : 47 years, Occ : Business, R/o Sanja Road, Sanja Ves, Osmanabad, Tq. & Dist.Osmanabad. 1-C) Ravindra S/o Maroti Todakari Age : 45 years, Occ : Business, R/o Sanja Road, Sanja Ves, Osmanabad, Tq. & Dist.Osmanabad. 1-D) Manoj S/o Maroti Todakari Age : 41 years, Occ : Business, R/o Sanja Road, Sanja Ves, Osmanabad, Tq. & Dist.Osmanabad. 1-E) Rajendra S/o Maroti Todakari Age : 36 years, Occ : Business, R/o Sanja Road, Sanja Ves, Osmanabad, Tq. & Dist.Osmanabad. 2. The State of Maharashtra. RESPONDENTS 2 ------------------------------------------------------ Mr.R.V. Naiknavare, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.S.S.Shete, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1A to 1C and 1E. ------------------------------------------------------ (CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE, J.) Date 12th October, 2009. -------------------------------- ORAL JUDGMENT : This appeal is preferred by Osmanabad Municipal Council which is acquiring body and at whose instance, the notification under section 125 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act was issued. The only grievance in this appeal is that while enhancing the compensation by the Reference Court vide its judgment and decree dated 23rd June, 1993 in L.A.R. No.2/1991, no notice was issued to the acquiring body. There was no participation by the acquiring body in the Reference Proceedings. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court reported in AIR 2002 S.C. 817 (Abdal Rasak and others V/s Kerala Water Authority and others) has urged that the acquiring body should have been issued the notice of reference petition and should have been permitted to participate 3 in the proceedings and examine the witnesses and cross examine the witness produced by the claimant. Although , the respondent no.1D served, none appears for him. 2. After hearing the parties, I am of the view that the matter is covered by the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court, as the appellant Municipal Council was the acquiring body and it was not made party to the proceedings and was thereby deprived of opportunity of defending the claim for enhancement of compensation. Hence, the instant appeal needs to be allowed. 3. The appeal is allowed as follows :- (i) The judgment and award dated 23rd June, 1993 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division Osmanabad in L.A.R. No. 02/1991 is quashed and set aside. ii) The matter is remitted back to the Reference Court for conducting the de novo trial. 4 iii) The appellant shall be deemed to have been joined as party defendant in the said reference proceedings and shall be permitted to file its written statement and oppose the claim for enhancement on such grounds as are available to it, in law. There shall be no order as to costs. iv) The learned Counsel for the appellant states that, the entire amount of Rs.92,500/- has been deposited by the appellant in this court, same shall be remitted to the reference court along with interest accrued thereon. Needless to say, that the Reference Court shall pass appropriate orders in respect of the same. If the claimant makes any application for withdrawal of amount, same shall be dealt with by the Reference Court in accordance with law. (R. K. DESHPANDE ) JUDGE GAS/fa1196.03