:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 139 OF 2004 1. Krishna Govind Naik (expired) through legal representatives 1(a) Mrs. Radha K. Naik, w/o Krishna G. Naik, 1(b) Mr. Gurudas K. Naik, s/o Krishna Naik, married, major, 1(c) Mrs. Gautami G. Naik, w/o Gurudas K. Naik, All residing at Tarvolem, Shiroda, Ponda Goa. 1(d) Mrs. Kamal L. Madgaunkar, w/o Laxman Madgaunkar d/o Krishna G. Naik, 1(e) Mr. Laximan Madgaunkar, married, major (son-in-law) Both residing at Pantimal Savordem, Curchorem Goa. 1(f) Mrs. Gomiti Harishchandra Naik, wife of H. Naik 1(g) Harishchandra Naik (son-in-law) Both residing at Bandolin, Sanguem Goa. 1(h) Mrs. Nali Umanath Naik, wife of Umanath Naik, d/o Krishna Naik 1(i) Mr. Umanath Naik, married, major, ( son-in-law), Both residing Behind Police Station, Shiroda, Ponda Goa. 1(j) Mrs. Laxmi S. Naik, w/o Subash Naik, d/o Krishna Naik, 1(k) Mr. Subash Naik, married, major, (son-in-law) Both residing at Kavlem, Ponda Goa. :2: 2. Vithal Govind Naik ( since deceased ) 3. Somu Govind Naik (Expired) through legal representatives 3(a) Premavati B. Naik, widow of Babuli Naik, housewife, 3(b) Manoj B. Naik, s/o Babuli Naik, married, 3(c) Mrs. Manisha Manoj Naik, wife of Manoj Naik, 3(d) Mr. Sandeep Babuli Naik, s/o Babuli Naik, major, unmarried, 3(e) Mr. Sanjay Babuli Naik, s/o Babuli Naik, major, unmarried, 3(f) Mr. Sameer Babuli Naik, s/o Babuli Naik, major, unmarried, 3(g) Mr. Anta Somu Naik, s/o S. G. Naik, married, 3(h) Mrs. Leelavati Anta Naik wife of Mr. Anta Naik, 3(i) Mr. Vasant S. Naik, s/o Somu Naik, married, 3(j) Mrs. Seema V. Naik, s/o Somu Naik, married, 3(k) Mr. Pandurang Somu Naik, s/o Somu Naik, married, 3(l) Mrs. Shanti P. Naik, wife of Mr. Pandurang Naik 4. Gonsu Esso Naik ( expired) through legal representatives 4(a) Mrs. Yashodi Gonsu Naik w/o Gonsu Naik, 4(b) Mr. Yesso Gonsu Naik, s/o Gonsu Naik, 4(c) Mrs. Kamal Yesso Naik, wife of Mr. Yesso Naik, :3: 4(d) Mr. Shivdas Gonsu Naik, married, 4(e) Mrs. Surekha Shivdas Naik, w/o Shivdas Naik, 4(f) Mr. Satyawan Gonsu Naik, s/o Gonsu Naik, married, 4(g) Mrs. Kamini Satyawan Naik, w/o Satyawan Naik, 4(h) Mr. Anil Gonsu Naik, s/o Gonsu Naik, unmarried, major, 4(i) Mr. Mahesh G. Naik, s/o Gonsu E. Naik, unmarried, 4(j) Mr. Lala Gonsu Naik, s/o Gonsu E. Naik, unmarried, All residing at Tarvolem, Shiroda, Ponda Goa. 4(k) Mrs. Kasturem Sagun Naik, Borcar, wife of Sagun Naik, Borcar, d/o Gonsu E. Naik, 4(l) Mr. Sagun Naik Borcar, married, Both residing at Shirshirem, Near Govt. Primary School, Borim, Ponda Goa. 4(m) Mrs. Saku Ratnakant Naik w/o Ratnakant Naik d/o Gonsu Esso Naik, 4(n) Mr. Ratnakant Naik married, Both residing at Bogda, Near Ganpati Temple, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa. … Appellants V e r s u s 1. Ramchandra Govind Naik, (expired) through legal representatives 1(a) Mr. Govind Ramchandra Naik, married, businessman, 1(a)(i) Shri Rohidas Govind Naik Shirodkar s/o Govind R. Shirodkar, :4: major of age, married, service, 1(a)(ii) Smt. Babi Rohidas Naik Shirodkar, Daughter-in-law of Rohidas Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, 1(a)(iii) Ramesh Govind Naik Shirodkar, s/o Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, 1(a)(iv) Vidhya R. Naik Shirodkar, Daugher-in-law of Rohidas Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, 1(a)(v) Dattaraj Govind Naik Shirodkar, s/o Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, 1(a)(vi) Suchita Dattaraj Naik Shirodkar, Daughter-in-law of Rohidas Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, 1(a)(vii) Alka Sunil Naik, wife of Sunil Naik, daughter of Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, 1(a)(viii) Sunil Naik, Son-in-law of Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, All resident of near Gomantak Printing Press St. Inez, Panaji Goa. 1(a)(xi) Arvind Govind Naik Shirodkar, s/o Govind Shirodkar, major of age, married, tailor, 1(a)(x) Namila Arvind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, Both r/o Tarvalem Shiroda Goa. 1(a)(xi) Mangala Shiva Naik, w/o Shiva Naik, daughter of Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, 1(a)(xii) Shiva Naik, Son-in-law of Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, Both r/o Fondche Bhat, Volvoi, Ponda Goa. :5: 1(a)(xiii) Smt. Bharati Bhanudas Naik, w/o Bhanudas Naik, daughter of Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, 1(a)(xiv) Shri Bhanudas Naik Son-in-law of Govind Naik Shirodkar, major of age, married, service, Both r/o Zari-wada, near Cine Metropole, Margao Goa. 1(b) Mrs. Bagiroti Govind Naik w/o Govind R. Naik, housewife, Both r/o Tarvolem, Shiroda, Ponda Goa. 1(c) Mrs. Rukmabai P. Naik, w/o Pandhari Naik, d/o Ramchandra Naik 1(d) Mr. Pandhari Naik, married, businessman (son-in-law) Both r/o Vikas General Stores Quepem Bazar, Quepem Goa. 2. Gokul Shiva Naik (expired) through legal representatives 2(a) Mrs. Geeta R. Shinde d/o Mukund Naik (applicant) 2(b) Mr. Ratan Ekanath Shinde (deceased) 2(b)(a) Shri Mahesh Ratan Shinde 2(b)(b) Smt. Manisha Mahesh Shinde w/o Mahesh R. Shinde 2(b)(c) Shri Uday Ratan Shinde 2(b)(d) Shri Vikram Ratan Shinde, All residents of House No.56, Tarvalem, Shiroda, Ponda Goa. 2(c) Mrs. Tulxi Krishna Naik, widow of Krishna Naik, d/o Gokul Naik 2(d) Mr. Pandurang K. Naik, s/o Krishna Naik :6: 2(e) Mrs. Jeevan Pandurang Naik, wife of Pandurang Krishna Naik 2(f) Mr. Ashok Krishna Naik, s/o Krishna Naik, married, 2(g) Mrs. Vasanti Ashok Naik, wife of Ashok Naik, All r/o Near Mandaleswar Temple, Vazem, Shiroda, Ponda Goa. … Respondents Shri J. Godinho, Advocate for the Appellants. Shri N. K. Sawaikar, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM :F. M. REIS, J. DATE : 10 th DECEMBER, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT The above Appeal challenges the judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 46/97 dated 4th March, 2004. The parties shall be referred to in the manner they so appear in the cause title of the impugned judgment. 2. By notification dated 25th April, 1991 published in the Official Gazette, the Government acquired the land for construction of road from Tarvalem to Carmona Dongor in Village Shiroda in Ponda Taluka. A portion of the property admeasuring an area of 40 square metres of survey No.394/2 part was intended to acquire. By an award of the Land Acquisition Officer :7: dated 12th February, 1993, in view of dispute amongst the interested parties with regard to the claim in the compensation in the acquired land, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the dispute under Section 30 of the said Act to the learned District Judge. By judgment and award dated 4th March, 2004, the learned Reference Court partly allowed the reference and held that the Applicant is entitled to 1/4th share in entire compensation and the claim of other interested parties was rejected. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the legal heirs of Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 have preferred the above Appeal. 3. Mr. J. Godinho, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants /Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 submitted that the said Respondents were actually in physical possession of the acquired land and as such the Reference Court ought not to have taken the sale deed dated 4th February, 1942 into consideration while deciding issue no.1. He further submitted that the said sale deed cannot be recognised in law and that the Decree in Civil Suit No.38/74 is inoperative and illegal. He further submitted that there is evidence on record that the said part of the property is in enjoyment of the said Respondents/Appellants and such enjoyment was along with other co-owners of the entire property including the land acquired. He further submitted that the Inventory Proceedings do not reflect that the property is owned and :8: possessed by the Applicants/Respondents herein. Learned Counsel took me through the evidence on record and pointed out that the Reference Court has totally misdirected itself in passing the impugned judgment and as such came to an erroneous conclusion whilst passing the impugned judgment. 4. On the other hand, Shri N. K. Sawaikar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents/Applicants has supported the impugned judgment. He pointed out that the Reference Court has minutely gone through the evidence produced on record and has rightly come to the conclusion as far as distribution of the compensation of the acquired land is concerned. He further submitted that there is no infirmity in any of the findings arrived at by the Reference Court and as such the Appeal deserves to be rejected. 5. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned judgment as well as the evidence on record, I express my opinion that considering the findings in the impugned judgment and material on record, it would be appropriate that the matter be remanded to the Reference Court to decide the reference afresh in accordance with law. I was proceeding to record my reasons and at that stage both the learned Counsel for the parties submitted that the matter can be remanded without recording any reasons as in case such reasons are given it may prejudice the case of the :9: respective parties. Learned Counsel further submitted that an opportunity be given to both the parties to lead further evidence and produce documentary evidence in support of their rival claim. I find that in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate that the matter be remanded to the Reference Court to decide the reference afresh after giving both the parties an opportunity to be heard in accordance with law. All the contentions raised by the parties are kept open. 6. In view of above, I pass the following order : O R D E R (i) The Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 4th March, 2004 is quashed and set aside. (iii) Land Acquisition Case No.46/97 is restored to the file of the Reference Court. The Reference Court is directed to decide the reference afresh after giving an opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence and produce documentary evidence, if any, in accordance with law. (iv) The Appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs. (v) The parties are directed to appear before the learned Reference Court on 10th January, 2011 at 10.00 a.m. and :10: abide by its further directions. F. M. REIS, J. at*