SHRIPAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition questions the order dtd. 11/04/2023 which rejects the application for deleting the names of the claimant nos.1, 2-C and 4 from the application under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, " LA Act ", hereinafter).

(2.) Mr. Patre, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on account of settlement arrived at between the parties the land in question i.e. 0.45 HR out of Gat No.225/2 total admeasuring 6.16 HR had come to the share of the present petitioner nos.1 and 2 and therefore there was no requirement of the claimant nos.1, 2-C and 4 in the reference, on account of which, the rejection of the deletion was improper. He also submits that the observation that under Sec. 18 of the LA Act it is not required to determine as to who is entitled to the compensation, is incorrect.

(3.) On a perusal of Sec. 18 of the LA Act it would be apparent that it enjoins upon the Reference Court amongst other things to decide the amount of compensation and so also the persons to whom it is payable or the apportionment of the compensation amongst the persons interested. The contrary observations therefore are incorrect.