1 70fa1249-02 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURSIDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1249 OF 2002 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant V/s. Narayan Laxman Mhatre .. Respondent ..... Mr. A. R. Patil, AGP for the appellant – State. Mr. P. G. Lad for the respondent. ..... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : DECEMBER 2, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : On 20th October, 2011 the hearing of the Appeal was concluded. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent requested the Court to defer the Judgment as he wanted to take instructions as regards remand subject to respondent making a statement that interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 shall be waived. 2. The challenge by the appellant-State is to the impugned Judgment and Award dated 4th January, 2002 passed by the Reference Court in a Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”). 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent on 2 70fa1249-02 instructions of the respondent states that due to misconception, the respondent could not adduce proper evidence and, therefore, an opportunity may be given to the respondent to adduce further evidence by passing an order of remand. He states that the respondent shall not claim interest under Section 28 of the said Act of 1894 from 5th January, 2002 even if the respondent succeeds in making out a case for enhancement of compensation. The learned AGP while opposing the submission stated that even if the order of remand is to be passed, the issue of bar of limitation of Reference Application under Section 18 of the said Act be kept open. 4. I have considered the submissions. A land admeasuring 2 Hectare and 43 R owned by the respondent has been lost due to compulsory acquisition. The respondent has not adduced proper evidence and, therefore, he seeks remand. As the respondent has categorically made a statement that he will not claim interest under Section 28 of the said Act from 5th January, 2002 (i.e. after the date of the impugned Judgment and Award), there will not be any prejudice to the State Government if order of remand is to be passed. Issue of bar limitation which is urged by the learned AGP is always open which can be decided by the Reference Court. 3 70fa1249-02 5. Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: i. The statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent on instructions of the respondent which is recorded above is accepted. ii. The impugned Judgment and Award dated 4th January, 2002 is quashed and set aside and the Land Acquisition Reference No.1 of 1995 is restored to the trial Court. iii. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Raigad at Alibag on 30th January, 2012 for fixing the schedule of hearing. iv. The Reference Court shall allow the parties to lead further evidence. After further evidence is adduced, the reference shall be decided a fresh after considering the evidence which is already on record and the evidence which will be adduced after remand. v. It is made clear that all contentions of the 4 70fa1249-02 parties including the contention of regarding bar of limitation of Reference Application under Section 18 of the said Act are kept open which will be decided by the reference Court. vii. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, in the event it is held that the respondent is entitled to additional market value, the respondent shall not be entitled to claim interest under Section 28 of the said Act with effect from 5th January, 2002. viii. Appeal is partly allowed on the above terms with no order as to costs. ix. R and P to be forthwith transmitted to the trial Court along with a special messenger. (A.S.OKA, J.)