Bombay High Court
SANDIP KAKASAHEB KHARAT.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The Court held that the earlier Reference Court judgments and awards must be quashed and the matters remitted for fresh determination, with claimants barred from claiming interest or statutory benefits for the period between the earlier award and August 2026.
Summary
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from land acquisition proceedings involving several members of the Kharat family against the State of Maharashtra. The Court noted that earlier judgments and awards of the Reference Court had been set aside and the matters were remitted for fresh determination. The appellants sought to adduce additional evidence, while the acquiring body argued that claimants should not receive interest or statutory benefits for the period between the earlier award and August 2026. The Court allowed the appeals in part, quashed the impugned judgments and awards, and ordered the Reference Court to reconsider the claims on their merits, disallowing interest and statutory benefits for the specified period. The parties were directed to appear before the Reference Court on 21‑09‑2026 without a separate notice, and all pending civil applications for additional documents were disposed of.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of setting aside the Reference Court's earlier judgments and awards.
- Whether claimants are entitled to interest and statutory benefits from the date of the earlier award to August 2026.
- The permissibility of parties adduced further evidence in the remitted proceedings.
- The scope of objections that the acquiring body may raise before the Reference Court.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- reference court
- remand
- interest
- statutory benefits
- evidence
- appeal
- quash
- re‑determination
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37894
(1) 940 CA 8482 OF 2026 to 947
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
940 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8482 OF 2026
IN FA/2321/2022
SULOCHANABAI SHESHRAO KHARAT.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
941 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8484 OF 2026
IN FA/7/2022
SANDIP KAKASAHEB KHARAT.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. P. Sonpawale, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
942 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8489 OF 2026
IN FA/2/2022
RAOSAHEB TEJRAO KHARAT AND ANR.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
943 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8492 OF 2026
IN FA/8/2022
(2) 940 CA 8482 OF 2026 to 947
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8490 OF 2026
IN FA/8/2022
VITHAL SHANKAR KHARAT SINCE DECEASED THR LEGAL REPR.
RAGHUNATH AND ORS.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. N. Kendre, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
944 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8493 OF 2026
IN FA/2337/2022
LAXMIBAI TRIMBAK KHARAT.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA,THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. R. K. Ingole, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
945 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8495 OF 2026
IN FA/2859/2022
NAYABRAO NAMDEV KHARAT.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. R. K. Ingole, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
946 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8496 OF 2026
IN FA/2662/2022
(3) 940 CA 8482 OF 2026 to 947
KACHRU NARAYAN KHARAT.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. A. V. Lavte, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
947 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8498 OF 2026
IN FA/9/2022
RAOSAHEB TEJRAO KHARAT.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8497 OF 2026
IN FA/03/2022
KAKASAHEB S/O RAMRAO KHARAT AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
...
Mr. A. H. Koralkar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Respondent/State
Mr. S. S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.3
…
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : 19.08.2026
PER COURT :-
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8497 OF 2026
. Not on board. Taken on board.
(4) 940 CA 8482 OF 2026 to 947
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8490 OF 2026 IN FA/8/2022
2. This civil application is filed for bringing on record legal representatives
of deceased claimant Vitthal Shankar Kharat.
3. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The
applicants are at liberty to bring on record legal representatives of the
deceased claimant Vitthal Shankar Kharat.
4. Amendment be carried out forthwith.
FIRST APPEALS
5. Mr. A. H. Koralkar, learned Advocate for the applicants submits that in
the group of First Appeals arising out of the same land acquisition
proceedings, this Court had set aside the judgments and awards and relegated
the parties back to the Reference Court with directions to the Reference Court
to decide the claims afresh in the light of the evidence that the parties had
produced and intended to produce. Keeping all points open, the matters were
relegated back. He submits that in the present matters, the applicants want to
adduce certain evidence of a similar nature which the claimants in the said
cited First Appeals sought to produce. Hence, he submits that the appeals be
disposed of and the parties be relegated back to the Reference Court.
6. Mr. S. S. Dande, learned Advocate for the acquiring body does not
dispute the fact of remittance of the matters to the Reference Court. His only
(5) 940 CA 8482 OF 2026 to 947
contention in respect of such remittance is that all the parties be left at liberty
to adduce such evidence in support of their claims as they wish to produce. He
would further submit that it may also be directed that the claimants shall not
be entitled to claim statutory benefits from the date of the earlier judgments
and awards passed by the Reference Court till August 2026.
7. For the reasons stated above, I pass following order :
ORDER
A. First appeals are allowed partly.
B. Impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference
Court are quashed and set aside and matters are relegated to
the Reference Court to decide them afresh on their own merits.
C. All points are kept open.
D. The Reference Court shall consider the objections to be
raised by the acquiring body as is permissible in law and shall
examine the genuineness of the claim on their own merits.
E. Appellants – claimants shall not be entitled to claim
interest and statutory benefits from the date of earlier
judgment and award passed by the Reference Court till August
2026.
F. Parties shall appear before the Reference Court on
21.09.2026. It is candidly agreed by the parties that no
separate notice for appearance shall be required.
(6) 940 CA 8482 OF 2026 to 947
G. The Reference Court shall decide the matters
expeditiously.
H. Civil applications for production of additional documents
are disposed of.
I. It will be open for the Reference Court to consider
earlier pleadings and the evidence on record in-justa position
with the subsequent pleadings and evidence.
[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
PRW
Checking your session…