Vijay Kumar Kundanmal Chorariya vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5820 Bom

Megha                                        28_wpst_297_2021.doc


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.297 OF 2021

Vijay Kumar Kundanmal Chorariya                          ...Petitioner
                      Versus
The State of Maharashtra and
Ors.                                                   ...Respondents
                                     ....
Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh with Ms Shubhangi Satre, Mr. Umaia Merchant i/
b. M/s. M.T. Miskita and Co. for the Petitioner.
Mr. Girish Godbole with Mr. Tanmay Vispute i/b. M/s. Little and Co. for
the Respondent.
Mr. S.H. Kankal, AGP for the Respondent-State.


                                   CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED: 31st MARCH, 2021.

P.C.:-

On the last date of hearing learned counsel for Respondent

No.3 has made a statement that First Appeal (stamp) No.1451 of 2020 is

pending before the Division Bench of this Court and that the necessary

precipe would be fled before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for tagging

this petition alongwith the said appeal. It is stated that no such precipe

has been fled, hence with consent this petition is disposed of fnally at

the stage of admission.

2. The Petitioner herein has challenged the order dated

Megha 28_wpst_297_2021.doc

22/10/2020 whereby Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alibag dismissed the

application fled by the Petitioner for returning the bank guarantee

furnished as per the order dated 11/07/2019.

3. The Petitioner herein had fled a reference under Section 18

of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for enhancement of compensation.

By order dated 12/03/2018 the reference court allowed the said

reference and accordingly enhanced the compensation. The Petitioner

had fled an application for withdrawal of the enhanced compensation

deposited by Respondent No.3 before the executing court. By order

dated 11/07/2019 the executing court allowed the Petitioner to

withdraw the compensation subject to giving an undertaking in respect

of 50% of the compensation and on furnishing bank guarantee

equivalent to the remaining 50% compensation. In terms of the said

order the Petitioner withdrew the compensation on furnishing

undertaking as well as bank guarantee.

4. Respondent No.3, claiming to be the acquiring body, has

fled an appeal against the judgment and award dated 12/03/2018

alongwith an application for condonation of delay and leave to appeal.

The Petitioner fled an application before the executing court for return

of bank guarantee on the ground that appeal fled by Respondent No.3

Megha 28_wpst_297_2021.doc

is not maintainable. By the impugned order dated 22/10/2020 the

executing court has dismissed the application stating that there is no

reason to relax the conditions regarding furnishing of bank guarantee.

This order is under challenge in this petition.

5. The appeal fled by Respondent No.3 is pending before the

Divisional Bench of this Court. It is stated that the Applicant has raised

the issue of maintainability of the appeal. It would not be prudent to

return the bank guarantee pending the decision of the Division Bench

on the issue of maintainability.

6. Hence, the Petition is dismissed. Renewal/return of the

bank guarantee shall be subject to the order of the Division Bench of

this Court in First Appeal (stamp) No.1451 of 2020, on an application to

leave to appeal or any further order.

(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)