1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL No. 1586 OF 2010 Sujanbai W/o Babruwan Ingale .. APPELLANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others ...RESPONDENTS ... Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for the appellant Smt. R.K. Ladda, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 3 Shri Surwase, Advocate for respondent No. 2 CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 15th November, 2010. PER COURT : The present appellant is the original claimant, he filed a reference bearing Land Acquisition Reference No. 1129 of 2009 before the Collector, who had referred it to the District Court. The District Court allotted the said matter to the Civil Judge Senior Division, Omerga, who vide its Judgment and Award dated 11th June, 2010 dismissed the Reference. The Reference Court held that the Reference is filed within the period of limitation and the amount of compensation was also withdraw under protest but 2 did not grant enhanced compensation on the ground that no evidence was led by the claimant. 2. Shri Kale, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that against the Award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer various persons had filed separate references and this reference was also part of the said group. The present claimant was under impression that if evidence is led in other matters the same would be considered in the present matter. The learned Counsel who represented the case before the Reference Court could not attend and intimate to the claimant that the matter is fixed for evidence, as such no evidence could be led. 3. Shri Survase, learned Counsel for the acquiring body and Mrs. R.K. Ladda,learned A.G.P. for the State, vehemently opposed the arguments of Mr. Kale to remand the matter on the ground that the claimant was not diligent and he cannot take advantage of his own wrong, in absence of any evidence brought on record. The Reference Court has properly dealt with the issue and 3 rejected the same. Even otherwise the Special Land Acquisition Officer has taken into consideration all aspects of the matter and awarded the reasonable and just amount of compensation. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. No doubt the evidence has not been led before the Reference Court by the claimant. The perusal of the Judgment and Award passed by the Reference Court shows that after the issues were framed on 27th July 2009, neither the claimant nor her Advocate appeared in the matter. The claimant is an illiterate lady residing in a rural village who would not be aware of the legal procedure. The claimant could not get the knowledge about the evidence to be led. 5. The claimant was not to gain by remaining absent but it was due to the fact that the claimant who is an old rustic lady residing in rural village, could not get the knowledge of the dates. As such, did not lead the evidence. 4 6. The immovable property of the claimant has been acquired. The opportunity deserves to be given to the applicant to adduce evidence to prove her case of getting enhanced compensation. 7. In the light of the same, I set aside the impugned Judgment and Award dated 11th June, 2010 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 1129 of 2009 and relegate the parties to the Reference Court. The Land Acquisition Reference No. 1129 of 2009 is restored to its original position. The Reference Court shall give opportunity to all the parties to adduce the evidence on the quantum of compensation and decide the same as expeditiously as possible. The parties shall appear before the Reference Court on 2nd December, 2010. The Reference Court shall, thereafter, decide the said reference within six months thereafter. The First Appeal is allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA] JUDGE SDM* 1586.10FA/151110