State Of Maharashtra Through ... vs Vinayak Nagorao Shende (Dead), ...

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 2275 Bom
Judgement Date : 4 May, 2016

Bombay High Court
State Of Maharashtra Through ... vs Vinayak Nagorao Shende (Dead), ... on 4 May, 2016
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
                                               1           fast12700.14.odt

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR




                                                                            
                          FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 12700 OF 2014 




                                                    
     1]         State of Maharashtra,
                through Collector, Amravati.




                                                   
     2]         The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
                Upper Wardha Project No.4.
                Amravati.




                                        
     3]         The Executive Engineer,
                Canal Division No.3, Dhamangaon Railway,
                             
                District : Amravati.

     4]         V.I.D.C through its Executive Engineer,
                            
                Lower Wardha Project, Wardha                          APPELLANTS

                                   ...VERSUS...
      

                Vinayak Nagorao Shede
                (deceased) throgh L.Rs
   



     1]         Sau. Indubai Vinayak Shende (wife),
                aged 60 yers.





     2]         Sau. Sonu Kailasrao Gadge (daughter),
                aged 32 years.

     3]         Satish Vinayak Shende (son)
                aged 29 years.





     4]         Mangesh Vinayak Shende (son),
                aged 26 yeas.

                Respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are
                R/o. Shidondi, Tq. Dhamangaon Railway,
                P.S. Manrud Dustgiri, Distt. Amravati.

                Respondent No.2 is R/o. Talegaon (Thakur),
                Tq.Tiwsa, P.S. Tiwsa, Distt. Amravati...... RESPONDENTS



    ::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2016                    ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:54:08 :::
                                                    2             fast12700.14.odt

     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Shri A.M.Kadu, AGP for appellant




                                                                                  
     Ms. Deepali Sapkal, Advocate h/f Shri A.S.Kilor, Advocate, for L.Rs of
     Respondent




                                                          
     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, J.

th DATE : 4 MAY, 2016 .

ORAL JUDGMENT Admit.

The learned counsel for L.Rs of sole respondent waives service of notice.

Heard finally by consent of learned counsels appearing for the parties.

2] The controversy involved in the present matter is covered by the decision of this Court delivered on 16 th March, 2016, in the matter of State of Maharashtra and 3 others vrs.

Purushottam Nagorao Nistane and 6 others, in First Appeal Stamp No. 12667 of 2014. This Court has maintained the decision of the Reference Court granting compensation at the rate of Rs.60,000/- per hectare.

3] In the present case also, arising out of the same notification, same award and acquisition for same purpose, ::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:54:08 ::: 3 fast12700.14.odt the Reference Court awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.60,000/- per hectare. Hence, for the reasons stated in the said judgment, the present appeal filed by the State Government is dismissed.

4] The learned AGP submits that Civil Application (F) No. 2096 of 2014 has been filed for grant of permission to deposit the entire decretal amount in this Court. The said application is allowed. The amount be deposited in this Court on or before 15th June, 2016. Upon deposit of such amount, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the same.

Appeal is dismissed. No orders as to costs.

JUDGE Rvjalit ::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:54:08 :::