KALABAI TULSHIRAM BAGALE Vs. DY COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal has been filed by the original respondent no.02, challenging the judgment and order in Civil M.A. No. 16/2015 filed by the present respondent no.01, which was reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, before learned Ad hoc District Judge-1, Dhule, which came to be decided on 27-11-2018. [Parties are referred as per their nomenclature before the trial Court, hereafter.]

(2.) Respondent no.01 had filed that reference with the contention that house property bearing no. 237 situated at village Divi, Taluka Shindkheda, District Dhule, to the extent of 42 square meters came to be acquired vide proposal no.26/2008. Final award was passed on 14-03-2013 and as per the said award, amount of compensation came to be fixed at Rs. 3,61,935/-. At the time of disbursement of the said amount, the co-sharers of the acquired property raised objection and, therefore, the reference was made.

(3.) After the reference was received, learned Ad hoc District Judge-1, Dhule, issued notices to the respondents - non-applicants. Non-applicant no.01 appeared and filed say, that the non-applicant no.02 has no concern with the acquired property. It was stated that the said property was never in the name of Tulshiram Muka Bagale, who was the husband of respondent no.02. Tulshiram Muka Bagale had expired in the year 1988 and prior to death, the property was standing in his name. It is stated that the respondent no.02, though appeared through Advocate, failed to file say within the stipulated period and, therefore, matter proceeded without her say. Thereafter again, vide application Exhibit 18, she had prayed for setting aside the said order and tried to tender say. That application was allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs. 500/- payable to respondent no.01. However, that costs was not paid and the matter thereafter proceeded without her say. Taking into consideration the evidence, it was held that only the respondent no.01 is entitled to get compensation and the entire amount has been directed to be given to him. This order is challenged by the present appellant.