1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 512 OF 2009. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 17 th July, 2009. ... . Heard Mr.Dalal, for the appellant/original claimant and Mrs. RR Mane, learned AGP for State. 2) In an unfortunate event, where the appellant/claimant suffered due to slackness of the counsel in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is subject of challenge. 3) Since the controversy was trivial in nature, original record need not be called, and by consent, the matter is finally heard at admission stage. 4) The agriculture field admeasuring 36 R. of the 2 appellant/claimant being land Survey No. 396 at village Murum, Tq. Omerga, District Osmanabad, was acquired for Benitura project, its possession was taken on 6.10.1992. The claimant being dissatisfied with the Award by learned Special Land Acquisition Officer, challenged the same by way of Reference, presented to the Collector, who remitted the same to the Court. 5) The matter was ready for evidence, however, the claimant/appellant or his counsel did not participate, evinced from the record dated 26.3.2007; 18.7.2007; 12.3.2008; 10.6.2008 and 18.6.2008. The Court also found that no efforts are made by the appellant or by his counsel to proceed with the matter, and the attitude and apathy constrained the Court to dismiss the Reference. 6) There cannot be two views on the slackness of the appellant or his counsel in prosecuting the matter. 3 However, the repentance demonstrated by the appellant, where he has a feeling of sufferance owing to acquisition of 36 R. of his property, the right, which he feels to be squeezed, should not be foreclosed. At least, there should be an opportunity to get the matter adjudicated on merits. 7) The fact remains, the protraction for a long duration should not be taken as a bonus for staking the claim for statutory benefits, like interest. Needless to add both the sides will be at liberty to adduce independent evidence. Consequently, the appeal is allowed with following directions - (i) The order under challenge in Land Reference No. 994/2005 dated 14.1.2009 is set aside; The learned Reference Court will independently decide the land Reference on its own merits and if he comes to a conclusion of entitlement for enhancement, in such 4 eventuality, the appellant shall not be entitled to statutory benefits of interest from 26.3.2007 till 17.7.2009. This naturally will be specifically mentioned in the order. . No costs. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/fa512.09