Quashed
Somnath Ramchandra Shiral v. the State of Maharashtra
Bombay HCFA/1093/2013
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Yes
What did the court decide?
Yes
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
fast8904-13.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.8904/2013
Somnath S/o Ramchandra Shiral Age 55 years, Occ-Agril R/o Wanewadi, Tq. Tuljapur Dist.Osmanabad, presently residing at Tadwala, Tq. Barshi Dist.Solapur.
.. Appellant
V/s
The State of Maharashtra Through the Collector, Osmanabad, Dist.Osmanabad. .. Respondent
Shri A.L.Tikale,Adv.for appellant. Smt.Y.M.Kshirsagar,AGP for respondent.
...
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. DATE : 5TH APRIL, 2013.
ORAL ORDER :
Heard. With consent of parties, appeal is heard finally at admission stage.
2] The Reference filed by the appellant u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is dismissed as the appellant did not adduce any evidence.
fast8904-13.odt
2
3] Shri Tikale, learned counsel for appellant submits that the appellant was not communicated with the date of evidence as such, could not remain present and lead any evidence. The Court though has observed that the reference is dismissed on merits, has not discussed any material or the averments made by appellant in the reference and only because the evidence of the claimant was not led, the claim is dismissed.
5] Perusal of the impugned order, it is observed that the claimant and his advocate were absent when the matter was called out. The claimant is an agriculturist and resides in rural village. The grounds put forth by appellant in the given circumstances, can be considered. However, the appellant cannot be allowed to have advantage of the delay caused by him.
6] Considering the above aspects of the matter,one opportunity needs to be given to the appellant. In the result, I pass following order :
7] The impugned judgment and award is quashed and set aside. Parties are relegated before the Reference Court. Parties shall appear before Reference Court on 30th April, 2013. Parties are allowed to adduce evidence. The Reference Court shall
fast8904-13.odt
3
thereafter, decide the reference expeditiously.
8] In case the Reference Court comes to the conclusion about enhancement of compensation, then the appellant would not be entitled for the statutory benefits from 7/2/2000 to 5/4/2013, as is undertaken by the appellant. Appeal is accordingly disposed of.
[S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.]
umg/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the reference filed under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act should be dismissed for lack of evidence or reconsidered given the appellant's reason for absence.
Whether the impugned judgment dismissing the reference should be quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Somnath S/o Ramchandra Shiral
The State of Maharashtra Through the Collector, Osmanabad
S.V.GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court