Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
Bombay High Court
Shivappa Nagappa Lade (Dead) Thr … vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 8 May, 2020
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 90 OF 2020 IN CA/7291/2019 IN FA/1909/2019 1. Shivappa s/o Nagappa Lade (Died) Through Legal Representative 1/1 Sanjay s/o shivappa Lade, Age 40 years, Occup.Agri., 1/2 Shrishailya s/o Shivappa Lade, Age 27 years, Occup.Agri., 1/3 Suvarna w/o Vijaykumar Lade, Age 38 years, Occup.Agri., 1/4 Sukeshna d/o Shivappa Lade, Age 36 years, Occup.Agri., 1/5 Kashibai w/o Sanjay Chendke, Age 34 years, Occup.Agri., Applicants/Original Claimants No.1/3 to 1/5 given Registered Relinquishment deed in favour of Applicants/Claimants No.1/1 and 1/2. 2. Sidram s/o Nagappa Lade, Age 75 years, Occup. Nil, All R/o Murum Taluka Omerga District Osmanabad. …Applicants. (Original claimant/Respondent in First Appeal) VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Collector, Osmanabad.::: Uploaded on – 08/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on – 09/05/2020 12:49:30 ::: 2 CriApln 90-2020 2. The Special land Acquisition Officer, (P.T. & L.M.I. Osmanabad). 3. The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Strengthens Division, Omerga District Osmanabad. …Respondents (Original Respondents) ….. Advocate for Applicants : Mr. G. K. Sontakke. AGP Respondent No.1/State : Mr. A. A. Jagatkar. Advocate for Respondents No.2 and 3:Mr. A. M. Gaikwad ….. CORAM : SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. Date of Reserving The Order : 21-02-2020. Date of Pronouncing The Order : 08-05-2020.ORDER :
1. Present application has been filed on behalf of the originalclaimants for review / modification in the order passed by this Court.
2. The present respondents have filed First Appeal No.1909 of2019 challenging the Judgment and award in land acquisitionproceedings i.e. Land Acquisition Reference No.122 of 2011, decidedby learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga on 02-08-2014. The appeal is admitted and it is pending before this Court forits turn for final hearing. They have also filed an application for stay ::: Uploaded on – 08/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on – 09/05/2020 12:49:30 ::: 3 CriApln 90-2020to the execution of the award and a conditional order was passed bythis Court. The appellant therein were directed to deposit the entiredecreetal amount awarded by the Reference Court along withinterest accrued within six weeks from the date of the order i.e. 22-06-2018. After the amount was deposited by the appellants therein,the present applicants had filed Application No.7291 of 2019 forwithdrawal of the amount. After hearing the parties, this Courtpassed following order : – “Applicants / Claimants are permitted to withdraw 50% amount of compensation. It be distributed between them equally subject to filing an undertaking.”
3. The applicants have come with a case that, the applicantsNo.1/3 to 1/5 have relinquished their rights from the land which wasacquired and it was registered relinquishment deed which wasexecuted in favour of applicants No.1/1 and 1/2. In view of the factthat they have relinquished their right, the applicants are seekingmodification to the order dated 06-09-2019. It is stated that, theamount which goes to the share of applicants No.1/3 to 1/5 shouldbe equally distributed amongst applicants No.1/1 and 1/2.
4. Heard learned Advocate Mr. G. K. Sontakke for applicants,learned Additional Government Pleader Mr. A. A. Jagatkar for ::: Uploaded on – 08/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on – 09/05/2020 12:49:30 ::: 4 CriApln 90-2020respondent No.1-State, and learned Advocate Mr. A. M. Gaikwad forrespondents No.2 and 3. In order to cut short it is stated that, allthe learned advocates have made submissions in support of theirrespective contentions.

5. Perusal of the record would show that, the land which wasacquired under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was owned bythe predecessor of the present applicants. It also appears that, theirpredecessor had initially filed the said reference, however after hisdeath the present applicants were brought on record before theJudgment was pronounced by the Trial Court on 02-08-2014. Thepresent applicants No.1/3 to 1/5 were the party claimants before theTrial Court. Perusal of the photocopy of relinquishment deed, whichis registered one, would show that it was executed on 19-11-2013.That means, when the matter was pending before the Trial Court,the said document appears to have been executed but then it wasnot produced before the Trial Court. There is absolutely noexplanation by the applicants to this effect. Under suchcircumstance when the award is in favour of all the applicants, andthe compensation amount is received in that matter, further whenno explanation is given as to why that document was not produced ::: Uploaded on – 08/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on – 09/05/2020 12:49:30 ::: 5 CriApln 90-2020before the Trial Court, there is no scope for any modification of theorder passed by this Court on 06-09-2019. It appears that, withsome ulterior motive the present application has been filed, there isabsolutely no merit in the application, any change cannot be madeat this interim stage. Hence, the application stands rejected.
(SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI) JUDGEvjg/-
::: Uploaded on – 08/05/2020 ::: Downloaded on – 09/05/2020 12:49:30 :::

News Reporter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: