Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vitthal Madan Patil, was the owner of land bearing Survey No. 39/6 admeasuring 01 Hectare 60 R situated at village Kolsur, Taluka Omerga, District Osmanabad. The land was acquired by the State of Maharashtra for construction of Kolsur Medium Project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) passed an award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, granting compensation of Rs. 45,235/-. Dissatisfied with the compensation, the appellant filed a Reference Petition under Section 18 of the Act before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga, seeking enhancement. The Reference Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution on 01-03-2013. The appellant filed an application for restoration, which was also dismissed. The appellant then filed the present first appeal before the Bombay High Court. The High Court observed that the Reference Court had dismissed the petition for default, not on merits, and that the appellant had shown sufficient cause for non-appearance. The High Court held that the Reference Court ought to have restored the petition and decided it on merits. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and award, and directed the Reference Court to restore the petition and decide it afresh on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to both parties.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Reference under Section 18 - Dismissal for default - Restoration - The Reference Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution when the appellant-claimant remained absent. The appellant sought restoration but the court refused, holding that the petition was dismissed on merits. The High Court found that the dismissal was not on merits but for default, and the appellant had shown sufficient cause for non-appearance. Held that the Reference Court ought to have restored the petition and decided it on merits. (Paras 1-10) B) Land Acquisition - Compensation - Enhancement - The appellant-claimant sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the SLAO for his acquired land. The High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Reference Court to restore the petition and decide it afresh on merits, after giving opportunity of hearing to both parties. (Paras 10-11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Reference Court was justified in dismissing the Land Acquisition Reference Petition for default and refusing to restore it, despite the appellant-claimant showing sufficient cause for non-appearance?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and award dated 01-03-2013, and directed the Reference Court to restore Land Acquisition Reference No. 134 of 2008 (Old LAR No. 152 of 2005) to its original file and decide it afresh on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to both parties.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 18
- Reference Petition
- Dismissal for default
- Restoration
- Sufficient cause
- Liberal approach
- Opportunity of hearing
