-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 55 OF 2003 Comunidade Of Loliem, Loliem, Canacona-Goa. …... Appellant V e r s u s 1. Anandibai Purshottam Prabhudessai a) Smt. Voijanti Narcinva HegdoDessai, (expired on 4.2.90), wife of late Narcinva Hegde Dessai, and her son; b) Shri Sandesh Narcinva Hegde Dessai, 43 yrs of age, c) Shri Swati Sandesh Hegde Dessai, 38 yrs, daughter of Anant Kamat Panjiker, wife of Sandesh N. H. Dessai, All residents of Quepem – Goa. d) Suranga Porobo Dessai alias Sheela Datta Kamat, e) Datta Kamat, hushand of Suranga P, Dessai, Both the above resident of Curchorem, Goa. f) Crisna P. P. Dessai alias Krishna P. P. Dessai, and his wife, g) Shamala Crisna Dessai alias Shamal Krishna P. Dessai, h) Datta P. P. Dessai alias Datta P. Prabhu Dessai, and his wife, i) Saroja Datta Porobo Dessai, alias Saroj Datta Prabhu Dessai, All presidents of Loliem, Canacona, Goa. (Amendment carried out as per order dated 10-10-11) 2. Venkatesh Laximan Varik, (since deceased) -2- represented by L. R.s a) Smt. Ratnabai Varik (widow) b) Laximkant V. Varik, (son), c) Smt. Varuni Prabhudessai, (daughter) d) Pratap V. Varik, (son), e) Smt. Kanchan P. Prabhudessai, (daughter) f) Mahesh V. Varik, (son), 3. Bhikaro Naik Satarkar Ghadi a) Durgao Bhikarao Satarkar, widow of Bhikaro Nihi Satarkar, and her sons; b) Nilesh Bhikaro Satrakar, bachelor, c) Ramesh Bhikaro Satarkar, bachelor, and his sister d) Vaishali Bhikaro Satarkar, spinster, All residents of Kazolker, Loliem, Canacona – Goa; and his sister; e) Asha alias Manasi Manoj Naik, w/o. Manoj A. Naik, r/o. RamMAndir, Pontemol, Curchorem, Goa. (Amendment carried out as per Order dt. 20.10.10.) 4. Dayanand Vithal Satarkar Ghadi. 5. Mahadev Hari Prabhu Dessai (Since deceased) represented by the L.Rs: a) Smt. Anusuya M. Prabhu Dessai (widow) b) Smt. Shaila Vinayak Kunde, (daughter) -3- c) Anand M. Prabhudessai (son) d) Smt. Vidhya Vijaykumar Prabhudessai (daughter) e) Santosh M. Prabhudessai (son) f) Smt. Teja alias Usha Uday Prabhudessai (daughter) g) Smt. Shantala alias Gopika Madhav Shinkre, (daughter). h) Vinayak Madhav Prabhudessai (son) All residents of Kazalker, Loliem, Canacona, Goa. 6. Sita Govind Prabhu Gaonkar a) Ratnakar Govind Gaonkar, and his wife b) Laxmi R. Prabhu Gaonkar, both r/o. Kazolker, Loliem, Canacona, Goa. (Amendment carried out as per Order dated 20.10.2010) …... Respondents Mr. V. R. Tamba, Advocate with Mr. D. D. Zaveri, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. S. Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Respondent nos. 1, 2a to 2f, 3, 4 5a to 5h & 6, Respondent nos. 2a to 2f. Coram :- F. M. REIS, J Date : 10 th October, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Shri Tamba, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Shri S. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. -4- 2. The above Appeal challenges the Judgment and Award dated 26.08.2002, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, South Goa, in Margao, in Land Acquisition Case no. 60/1988. Pursuant to the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as the said 'Act'), an area of 5000 square metres was acquired from the property surveyed under no. 116/12 of Loliem Village, for the widening and improvement of the National Highway-17. Whilst passing an Award under Section 11 of the said Act in view of the rival claims of the parties, the Land Acquisition Officer made a reference under Section 30 of the said Act for apportionment of compensation between the Appellants and the Respondents. By the impugned Judgment and Award dated 26.08.2002, the Reference Court allowed the said reference and directed the apportionment in the following manner : 1. Compensation is respect of area of 1188 square metres to party no.2 (res. no.1) Anandibai Purshottam Prabhu Dessai. 2. Compensation is respect of area of 1246 square metres to legal representatives of party no.3 (res. no.2) Venkatesh Laximan Varik. 3. Compensation in respect of area of 1128 square metres to party no. 6 (resp.no.4) Dayanand Vithal Satarkar Ghadi. 4. Compensation is respect of area of 1025 square metres to party no.7 (res. no.5) Mahadev Hari Prabhudessai, and 5. Compensation is respect of area of 412 square metres to party no.8 (res. no.6) Sita Govind Prabhu Gaonkar. -5- 3. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Award, the Appellants, Communidade of Loliem, who were the Applicants/party no.1 in the reference proceedings, have preferred the present Appeal. 4. After hearing the learned Counsel for both the parties for sometime, Shri Tamba, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants pointed out that though in the impugned Judgment the Reference Court has referred to the voluminous documents produced by both the parties, there was no scrutiny of the material produced by the respective parties to arrive at the conclusion that the Respondents were entitled to the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The learned Counsel further pointed out that in the Survey Records in respect of the property surveyed under no. 116/12 the name of the Appellant as well as the names of the Respondents figure and, as such, the presumptions in law have not even been drawn which itself vitiates the impugned Judgment. 3. Shri Usgaonkar, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, upon instructions from the Respondents, pointed out that considering the contentions of the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants, the matter can be remanded to the Reference Court to decide the reference afresh after giving an opportunity to both the parties to lead further evidence if so desired in accordance with law by keeping all the contentions of the parties open. 4. At this stage, Shri Tamba, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants has pointed out that during the pendency of the above Appeal, the -6- compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer has already been withdrawn by the Respondents. Shri Usgaonkar, the learned Counsel points out that the amount withdrawn be made subject to further Orders which may be passed by the Reference Court at the final disposal of the reference proceedings. 5. In view of the above, I pass the following : ORDER (i) The impugned Judgment and Award dated 26.08.2002 is quashed and set aside. (ii) The Land Acquisition Case No. 60/1988 is restored to the file of the Reference Court. (iii) The Reference Court is directed to decide the reference afresh after hearing both the parties and after giving an opportunity to both the parties to lead further evidence if so desired in accordance with law. (iv)The amount of compensation withdrawn by the Respondents shall be subject to the final Award which shall be passed in the said Reference Proceedings. (v) Parties are directed to appear before the Reference Court on 14.11.2011 at 10.00 a.m. (vi) All contentions raised by both the parties on merits are left open. F .M. REIS, J. arp/*