Bombay High Court
Vithoba Maruti Murme (Died) Thr ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 11 June, 2021
Bench: R. G. Avachat
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 05/07/2021
C.A. No.4265/2021
:: 1 ::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4265 OF 2021 IN
FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.38208 OF 2017
Vithoba Maruti Murme,
Died through L.Rs.
Suman Vitthal Murme & ors. ... APPLICANTS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... RESPONDENTS
.......
Shri A.B. Kale, Advocate for applicants
Shri B.V. Virdhe, A.G.P. for State.
.......
CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT, J.
DATE : 11th JUNE, 2021
ORDER:
The applicants hereby seek withdrawal of the
amount of compensation deposited in this Court by the
respondents pursuant to the order dated 8/6/2018.
2. Heard Mr. Kale, learned counsel for the applicants
and learned A.G.P. Perused the application and the impugned
award.
3. The land of the applicants has been compulsorily
acquired long back. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
grant of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 05/07/2021
C.A. No.4265/2021
:: 2 ::
Officer, a reference was made (No.485/2014). The same has
been allowed vide judgment and award dated 26/3/2015,
enhancing the compensation @ Rs.750/- per R. (including one
granted by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. It has been
stated that, reference made by some other claimants have
been allowed, granting enhancement of compensation. The
acquiring body has not preferred appeal thereagainst. Those
claimants filed execution proceedings and have withdrawn the
amount of compensation.
4. The reference was filed by four siblings namely
Suman, Balaji, Netaji and Sambhaji Murme, being legal
representatives of the original owner late Vithoba. It appears
that, Balaji died pending reference. His legal representatives
were not brought on record. This Court, vide order dated
23/1/2020, observed :-
"It appears that original claimant No.2
namely Balaji Vitthal Murme had preferred
LAR No.485 of 2014 against the Acquiring
Body. But, pending the Reference Petition, he
passed away on 27/7/2008. His legal heirs
were not brought on record in the Reference
Petition, hence proceeding stands abated
against the said claimant No.2 after efflux of
stipulated period. Therefore, the applicants
i.e. legal heirs of claimant No.2 Balaji Vitthal
Murme, have no way concerned at all with the
present proceeding as their names were not
recorded on behalf of the appellant -
Acquiring Body by adopting the legal
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 05/07/2021
C.A. No.4265/2021
:: 3 ::
procedure. In such circumstances, both the
civil applications filed by the legal heirs of
original claimant No.2 Balaji Vitthal Murme,
being inapt and premature, stand dismissed."
5. The legal representatives of late Balaji Murme are
at liberty to take appropriate steps to come on record in the
First Appeal (Stamp No.38208/2017) and the related Civil
Applications. The claim for withdrawal of the amount by legal
representatives of late Balaji Murme would, therefore, be
considered after they are brought on record.
6. Since the acquiring body did not prefer any appeal
in the connected matters, and the claimants therein have
withdrawn the amount in execution proceedings, I am inclined
to allow the present Civil Application in terms of the following
order :
ORDER
The applicants No.1, 3 and 4 be paid 50% of the
amount deposited in the Court on condition of furnishing an
undertaking and solvent surety to the satisfaction of the
Registrar of this Court.
( R. G. AVACHAT )
JUDGE
fmp/-
