Nanabhau Apparao Thosar Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Nanabhau Apparao Thosar Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned judgment and award set aside; reference court directed to decide the reference afresh after adding the acquiring body as party respondent with opportunity to lead evidence; acquiring body permitted to file its written statement within three weeks of its appearance; parties to remain present before the trial court on 15.12.2025; reference to be decided finally within six months; costs may be imposed if advocates or parties do not cooperate; appellant's advocate to communicate the order to the reference court within a week; amendment adding the acquiring body to be carried out within a week after receipt of the writ, whereupon notice shall issue to the acquiring body.

Issue for consideration

Whether the first appeal should be allowed and the impugned judgment and award set aside, with the reference remanded to the reference court for fresh disposal after adding the acquiring body as party respondent.

Court's answer

Considering the facts situation of the case and in the interest of justice, particularly because the mistake was committed by the advocate and the litigant should not suffer, the appeal deserves to be allowed with direction to decide the reference on merits after adding the acquiring body as party respondent in the said proceeding.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

LAND ACQUISITION — REFERENCE COURT AWARD — NON-IMPLEADING OF ACQUIRING BODY: First Appeal No. 621 of 2006 allowed. The judgment and award of the reference court/Additional District Judge, Beed in L.A.R. No. 170 of 1995 dated 05.01.2006 was set aside because the acquiring body had not been made a party to the reference, so the rights of the parties and the dispute could not be finally concluded in merits. The reference court was directed to decide the reference afresh after adding the acquiring body as party respondent, with opportunity to lead evidence and permission to the acquiring body to file its written statement within three weeks of appearance; parties to appear before the trial court on 15.12.2025; final disposal directed within six months as an old reference of 1995; costs threatened for non-cooperation. Mistake of counsel was held not to make the litigant suffer.

2025:BHC-AUG:30483

fa621.06

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

940 FIRST APPEAL NO. 621 OF 2006

Nanabhau Apparao Thosar VERSUS

The State Of Mah And Ors

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Jayabhar Dattatraya R. AGP for Respondent No.1: Mr. S.B. Jadhav

CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATED : 6^th NOVEMBER 2025

PER COURT :-

Heard learned advocate for the appellant and learned A.G.P. for respondent No.1.

This appeal is preferred against the judgment and award passed by the reference court/Additional District Judge, Beed in L.A.R. No. 170 of 1995, dated 05.01.2006.

Learned advocate for the appellant pointed out that the acquiring body was not party to the said reference. He therefore, submits that unless the acquiring body is party to the reference, the rights of the parties and dispute cannot be concluded finally in merits. Therefore, he seeks to remand the matter to the reference court for fresh disposal by setting aside the impugned judgment and award

fa621.06

-2-

with permission to add the acquiring body as party respondent.

Learned A.G.P. for respondent No.1 State strongly opposed the appeal.

Considering the facts situation of the case and in the interest of justice, particularly for the mistake committed by the advocate, the litigant should not suffer, the appeal deserves to be allowed with direction to decide the reference on merits after adding the acquiring body as party respondent in the said proceeding. Hence, the following order:-

O R D E R

I. The impugned judgment and award passed by the reference court/Additional District Judge, Beed in L.A.R. No. 170 of 1995 dated 05.01.2006 is set aside.

II. The reference court is directed to decide the reference afresh after adding the acquiring body as party respondent with opportunity to lead evidence, if any.

III. The acquiring body is permitted to file their written

fa621.06

-3-

statement. The parties to this proceeding shall also remain present before the trial court on 15.12.2025 and for that purpose it is not necessary to issue notice to them. The acquiring body shall file their written statement within a period of three weeks after their appearance. The reference court is directed to decide the reference finally within a period of six months, as it is an old reference of the year 1995.

IV. If the advocates or the parties are not co-operating to reference court for deciding the reference within the time frame, it would be proper to impose costs on the parties.

V. The learned advocate for the appellant to communicate this order to the reference court within a week from today.

VI. After amendment is carried out, the reference court shall issue notice to the acquiring body. The amendment for adding acquiring body shall be carried out within a week after receipt of the writ of this order by the reference court.

(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)

rlj/