Bombay High Court
RAOSAHEB TEJRAO KHARAT.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH, COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The appeals are partly allowed; the earlier judgments and awards are quashed and the matters are remitted to the Reference Court for fresh determination, with claimants barred from claiming interest or statutory benefits.
Summary
The petitioners, members of the Kharat family, filed several civil applications seeking relief in land acquisition proceedings. They argued that the Reference Court had previously passed judgments and awards which should be set aside and the matters remitted for fresh determination, allowing them to produce additional evidence. The State of Maharashtra, represented by various Assistant Government Pleaders and the acquiring body’s counsel, conceded the remittance but contended that the claimants should not be entitled to interest or statutory benefits for the period between the earlier award and the remittance. Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar allowed the first appeals in part, quashed the earlier judgments and awards, and ordered the Reference Court to reconsider the claims afresh without granting interest or statutory benefits. The court also directed that all points remain open, that the acquiring body may raise objections, and that the parties appear before the Reference Court on a specified date.
Issues considered
- Whether the judgments and awards of the Reference Court should be set aside and the matters remitted for fresh consideration.
- Whether the claimants are entitled to interest and statutory benefits for the period between the earlier award and the remittance.
- Whether the parties may adduce additional evidence and objections in the remitted proceedings.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- reference court
- remittance
- interest
- statutory benefits
- evidence production
- first appeal
- quashing judgment
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37901
(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…