1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY : AURANGABAD BENCH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 765 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2990 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICTION NO. 769 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1721 OF 2008 1. Rajaram s/o Sayaji Mahajan, age 65 years, occ. agriculturist, R/o. Erandole, Dist Jalgaon. - - Applicant [ Orig. claimant ] versus 1. Special Land Acquisition Officer-1, Jalgaon, dist. Jalgaon and 12 others. - - - Respondents Shri A. B. Kale, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri S. K. Kadam, Asstt. Govt Pleader for Respondent No.1. Shri V. S. Yadav, Advocate h/f. Shri M. K. Goyanka, Advocate for the Respondents No.2. Shri C. K. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3-a to 3-e to 10 and 12, 13. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. Dated : 6th August 2009 PER COURT : 1 These civil applications, being decided by a common order, 2 are for corrections in title clause of the judgment under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the applicant, original claimant. 2. Heard Shri Kale, learned Counsel for the applicant, Shri S. K. Kadam, learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent No.1, Shri V. S. Yadan, learned Counsel for respondent No.2 and Shri C. K. Shinde, learned Counsel for rest of the respondents. 3. The applicant/ claimant preferred References to the Collector on 24-10-1986 numbered as old L.A.R. No. 11/1991 and new L.A.R. No. 971/2005 and L.A.R. No. 14/1991. In the said Reference, there was an application filed by respondents Nos.3 to 13 for adding them as party on 6-3-1991 which came to be allowed by learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon by Order dated 16-4-1991 and they were permitted to add themselves as respondents/ opponents Nos.3 to 13. They were also permitted to file written statement. Accordingly, amendment was carried out on 18-6-1991. Thus, respondents Nos.3 to 13 were added as original opponents in the proceedings. Subsequently, heirs of the deceased Kashinath Mahajan who expired on 13-12-2002, were brought on record in his place and they participated in the 3 proceeding and were shown as respondents/ opponents. 4. The said Reference was heard by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon and it was decided on 6-12-2007 and in the said Award, according to the applicant, present respondents were wrongly included as claimants and their names were shown as claimants in the impugned judgment. It was noticed when the applicant applied for certified copy of the impugned judgment on 11-12-2007 and the same is received on 11-2-2008. Therefore, the applicant pointed out this aspect to the Reference Court on 24-3-2008. An application was made under section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure to delete their names in the title clause of the judgment where they are shown as applicants and for necessary corrections. The said application for correction was not considered by Reference Court and it was observed that correction was beyond the scope of Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure and has rejected the application of the applicant by Order dated 30-9-2008. The applicant, therefore, felt aggrieved and hence this civil application came to be filed for necessary correction in the title clause of the judgment and award of the Reference Court. It is submitted that the correction sought was not in the finding of the judgment. 4 5. We have also heard Shri Shinde, learned Counsel for the respondents. The facts recorded above are not disputed. Simultaneously, it was also pointed out to us that the deceased brother's legal heirs supported the claim of applicant for enhancement of compensation and also gave evidence in support of the applicant. However, it appears that there are dispute amongst the claimants and other family dispute over a partition which is outside the scope of the preference Reference proceedings decided under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act at the instance of the present applicant. Therefore, there is apparent error in the judgment where those respondents are shown as applicants Nos.3 to 13 in the absence of any specific order. Application for correction deserves to be considered. Thus, applicants Nos.3 to 13 shown in the judgment as claimants should be shown as respondents Nos.3 to 13, since the appeal is the continuation of the suit. 6. Both the Civil Application are allowed in terms of prayer clause (C) and accordingly disposed of. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J. ) ( B. R. GAVAI, J. ) pnk/ca76509