Bombay High Court

DAGADU YADAV DALALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The 30‑April‑2009 judgment and award is quashed and the land acquisition reference is restored to its original position.

Summary

The petitioner, Dagadu Yadav Dalal, challenged a 2009 judgment and award of a land acquisition reference that had been dismissed because he failed to appear or present evidence. He filed a writ petition in 2020, invoking a precedent (Walmik Trimbak Tupe v. State) to seek restoration of the reference despite a long delay. The High Court noted the petitioner’s inordinate delay but, considering the nature of land acquisition, granted him an opportunity to prosecute the matter on merits. The court quashed the 2009 judgment and award, restored the reference to its original position, and ordered the petitioner to appear before the reference court and present evidence, while denying interest for the period of dismissal. The writ petition was allowed with directions for expeditious disposal of the reference.

Issues considered

Whether a land acquisition reference dismissed for non‑appearance can be set aside despite a substantial delay in filing a writ petition
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on the award from the date of dismissal to the present

Subjects

land acquisition
reference court
procedural delay
quashing judgment
interest entitlement
writ petition

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:12916
1 of 3 58-WP.2233.2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

58 WRIT PETITION NO. 2233 OF 2020

DAGADU YADAV DALAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTOR
AND ANOTHER
...
Ms. Laxmi R. Thakur h/f. Mr. Laxmikant C. Patil, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mrs. D. S. Jape, AGP for Respondent-State.
...

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 24rd MARCH 2026
P.C.:-

1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

2. The Petitioner is taking an exception to the judgment and

award dated 30.04.2009 passed by learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior

Division, Omerga, District Osmanabad in L.A.R. No.775/2005 (old

No.252/2001), thereby dismissing the reference in the absence of the

Petitioner.

3. Petitioner is the claimant whose land was acquired and

award was passed. Being aggrieved, he preferred L.A.R. No.775/2005

(old No.252/2001). Petitioner did not adduce any oral or documentary

evidence before the Reference Court. He did not punctually prosecute

the reference and in his absence, reference was dismissed by the

impugned judgment and award.

Tauseef
2 of 3 58-WP.2233.2020

4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is relying on the judgment

dated 17.01.2020 passed by the Coordinate Bench in the matter of

Walmik Trimbak Tupe Vs. State and Another in Writ Petition

No.1279/2019 and the connected matters. He would pray to pass

similar order in the present petition.

5. Learned AGP, Mrs. D. S. Jape vehemently opposes the

submission of the Petitioner. He submits that Petitioner is the fence

sitter. After the impugned judgment and award, there is inordinate

delay for him to file the writ petition in High Court. There is no

convincing and plausible explanation for the inordinate delay. Learned

Reference Court has rightly rejected the reference on merit. He would

therefore pray to dismiss the petition.

6. The Petitioner did not adduce evidence when his reference

was pending. He failed to prosecute it diligently. Even after, dismissal

of the reference, he did not approach this Court in time. Present

petition is filed on 13.01.2020. The huge delay in approaching this

Court is attributable to the Petitioner. However the Petitioner wants to

lead evidence and prosecute the matter on merits. As it is the matter of

acquisition of the land, I deem it appropriate to grant one opportunity.

Besides that, I propose to follow the same reasons and the course as

done by the coordinate bench in the matter of Walmik Trimbak Tupe

(supra).

Tauseef
3 of 3 58-WP.2233.2020

7. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, submits

that his clients are ready to forego interest from 30.04.2009 to

24.03.2026. This statement can be accepted as an undertaking to this

Court. I, therefore, pass following order :

ORDER

(i) The judgment and award dated 30.04.2009 passed by
learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga,
District Osmanabad in L.A.R. No.775/2005 (old
No.252/2001) is quashed and set aside.

(ii) The partie is relegated to the Reference Court by
restoring L.A.R. No.775/2005 (old No.252/2001) to its
original position. Petitioner shall appear before the
Reference Court on 25.05.2026.

(iii) The concerned Reference Court shall permit the parties
to lead oral and documentary evidence in support of
their rival contentions.

(iv) The Reference Court shall dispose of Land Acquisition
Reference as expeditiously as possible and preferable
within period of six months from 25.05.2026.

(v) The Petitioner shall cooperate for expeditious disposal
of the Reference Petition.

(vi) The Petitioner shall not be entitled to receive interest
for the period from the date of dismissal till today.

(vii) Writ Petition is allowed in the above terms.

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)

Tauseef

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…