Bombay High Court
The Ex. Engineer, Minor ... vs Shankar Rambhau Gadhave on 3 February, 2021
Bench: V.L. Achliya
1150.21CA+.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
910 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1150 OF 2021
IN FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.23767 OF 2020
...
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION
MEDIUM PROJECT, OSMANABAD & OTHERS
VERSUS
ANNASAHEB MARUTI GADHAVE
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1152 OF 2021
IN FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.24703 OF 2020
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1154 OF 2021
IN FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.24696 OF 2020
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1156 OF 2021
IN FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.24710 OF 2020
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1158 OF 2021
IN FIRST APPEAL [STAMP] NO.24716 OF 2020
...
Mr.R.A.Tambe, Advocate for the applicants -
acquiring body.
Mr.L.C.Patil, Advocate for the respondents -
claimants
...
CORAM : V.L.ACHLIYA,J.
DATE : 03.02.2021
P.C.
1] The applicants have preferred these
applications seeking stay to the execution of
the award passed by the Reference Court for
the reasons set out in detail in the
applications.
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2021 23:38:39 :::
1150.21CA+.odt
2
2] Heard learned counsel for the
applicants - appellants and the counsel
representing the respondents - claimants.
3] In brief, it is the contention of
the learned counsel for the applicants -
appellants that the award passed by the
Reference Court is not sustainable in law.
There is no supporting evidence to enhance
the compensation. He further submits that the
Reference Court has erred in holding the
interest from the date of possession, which
is contrary to the Full Bench decision of
this Court in the case of State of
Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari
reported in 2016 [3] Mh.L.J.457. In this
background, learned counsel submits that
there is arguable case to be considered in
appeal. In case the execution of the impugned
judgment and award is not stayed, the purpose
of filing of appeal would be frustrated.
4] Learned counsel for the respondents
- claimants support the judgment and order
passed by the Reference Court and submits
that appeals are devoid of merits.
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2021 23:38:39 :::
1150.21CA+.odt
3
5] Considering the submissions made and
the challenges raised in appeal, I am of the
view that the execution of the award passed
by the Reference Court deserves to be stayed
subject to deposit of the amount to the
extent of 75% of the award passed by the
Reference Court. Accordingly, the following
order is passed :
ORDER
i] The applications are partly allowed.
ii] There shall be interim relief in
terms of prayer clause-B in respective
application subject to deposit of amount to
the extent of 75% of award passed by the
Reference Court in respective cases, within
twelve [12] weeks from the date of passing of
this order.
iii] Failure to deposit the amount within
stipulated period, the stay granted stands
vacated without further reference to Court
unless time is extended before the due date
to deposit the amount.
[V.L.ACHLIYA]
JUDGE
DDC
