IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.876 of 1991. FIRST APPEAL NO.876 of 1991. FIRST APPEAL NO.876 of 1991. The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant versus Ananda Vedu Krunde ..Respondent with FIRST APPEAL NO.877 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.877 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.877 OF 1991 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant versus Bhaurao Yadav Desale ..Respondent with FIRST APPEAL NO.878 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.878 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.878 OF 1991 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant versus Baburao Nathu Tandale ..Respondent with FIRST APPEAL NO.879 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.879 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.879 OF 1991 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant versus Drupadabai w/o. Mangu ..Respondent with FIRST APPEAL NO.882 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.882 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.882 OF 1991 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant -2- versus Pundalik Shankar Surase ..Respondent with FIRST APPEAL NO.884 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.884 OF 1991 FIRST APPEAL NO.884 OF 1991 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant versus Karbhari Biraji Raut ..Respondent Ms.S.P.Manchekar, AGP in F.A.Nos.876 & 877 of 1991 Ms.G.P.Mulekar, AGP in F.A.Nos.878 & 879 of 1991 Ms.A.A.Mane, AGP in F.A.Nos.882 & 884 of 1991 None for the respondents CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 15th April, 2009. DATED : 15th April, 2009. DATED : 15th April, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT. ORAL JUDGMENT. ORAL JUDGMENT. 1. These appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment. The respondents in the aforesaid First Appeals lost their lands as the same came to be acquired by the appellant in accordance with the provisions of Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The respective respondents filed land references in accordance with the provisions of Section 18 of the said Act in the District Court at Nasik. The Land References covering these appeals came to be taken -3- up and were decided by the learned Joint District Judge, Nasik (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Judge) by Judgment and Order dated 31.7.1990 passed in the individual reference. The learned trial Judge granted compensation, more particularly set out in the respective Order dated 31.7.1990. The said Order dated 31.7.1990 passed in the respective land reference is challenged by filing the First Appeal and that is how the aforesaid appeals are taken up together for hearing. My attention was drawn to the impugned judgment dated 31.7.1990 by the learned Asst. Government Pleader Ms. Manchekar and it was pointed out that the reasoning given in the judgment deciding the land reference No.44 of 1987 to 51 of 1987 and 103 of 1087 to 106 of 1987 is used for the purpose of awarding compensation in these references. It was submitted across bar by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that since the Order passed in the Land Reference Nos.44 of 1987 to 51 of 1987 and 103 of 1987 to 106 of 1987 have been set aside by this Court, while deciding First Appeal No.408 of 1990 and other connected 11 first appeals, this Court should now set aside the Order dated 31.7.1990 passed in Land Reference Nos.43/1986, 48/1986, 175/1986, 174/1989, 46/1986 -4- and 45/1986 and remand the land references to the District Court for decision in accordance with the provisions of law. 2. I have considered the submission made by the learned Addl. Government Pleader, across the bar and the said submission is required to be accepted. Keeping in view the fact that in this case no evidence was placed before the Court on behalf of either the claimants or the State and the principle laid down in some other reference came to be used to decide these matters. Since the Judgment dated 22.6.1989 passed in Land Reference No.44 of 1987 to 51 of 1987 and 103 of 1987 to 106 of 1987 have been set aside, the orders in the present references are also required to be set aside and these references are required to be remanded to the District Court, Nasik for determination in accordance with the provisions of law. 3. In my view, the aforesaid arrangement will meet the ends of justice as I wish to allow the respective claimants or the State to lead evidence if they so desire, in support of their respective cases. -5- 4. In view of the above, the aforesaid first appeals are disposed of by passing the following Order. ORDER . The judgment and Order dated 31.7.1990 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Nasik in Land Reference No.43 of 1986, 48 of 1986, 175 of 1986, 174 of 1989, 46 of 1986, 45 of 1986 are set aside. ii. The record and proceeding of the aforesaid land references be send back to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Nasik. The aforesaid land references are restored to the file of the District Court, Nasik. iii. Upon receipt of the record of the aforesaid references, the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nasik, shall assign the aforesaid land references to one Judge who would dispose of these references. iv. Upon the said assignment, the concerned -6- Judge shall issue notices to the claimants in the respective land references who can have the opportunity to lead evidence, if they so desire in support of their respective claim, as well as give opportunity to the State to lead evidence, if the State desires and after the completion of the aforesaid procedure, hear the respective parties and decide the land references in accordance with the provisions of law. v. The learned Judge, to whom the references shall be assigned shall take up these references as expeditiously as possible and dispose them of. It is clarified that no views are expressed on merits of the matter. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.)