Bombay High Court
Yashoda Suryakant Yadav (Died) ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 5 October, 2021
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge, S. G. Mehare
1 904-CA.128-21 & ors..odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
904 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.128 OF 2021
IN FA/2951/2019
SHRIMANT GYANBA NAGIME
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
WITH CA/9894/2019 IN FA/2945/2019 WITH CA/130/2021
IN FA/2955/2019 WITH CA/131/2021 IN FA/2960/2019
WITH CA/9922/2019 IN FA/2949/2019 WITH CA/9918/2019
IN FA/2951/2019 WITH CA/132/2021 IN FA/2945/2019
WITH CA/9896/2019 IN FA/2960/2019 WITH CA/9907/2019
IN FA/2955/2019 WITH CA/9916/2019 IN FA/2952/2019
WITH CA/127/2021 IN FA/2949/2019 WITH CA/129/2021 IN
FA/2952/2019
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Patil V. B.
AGP for Respondent/s-State : Mr. S. R. Yadav-Lonikar.
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. S. G. Karlekar.
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, AND
S. G. MEHARE, JJ.
DATE : 05.10.2021
PER COURT :-
In Civil Applications for withdrawal of amount
1. By these applications, the applicants prays for
withdrawal of the amount that has been deposited in this
Court by the appellant. This Court had passed an order on
2 904-CA.128-21 & ors..odt
23.08.2019, thereby directing the appellant to deposit the
entire award amount in this court.
2. We have considered the extensive submissions of the
learned advocate for the applicants, Mr. Karlekar, the learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the acquiring body and the
learned AGP on behalf of the State.
3. There is no dispute that the Land Acquisition Officer has
granted compensation of Rs.3,000/- per R. to the petitioners/
applicants and similarly situated claimants, whose lands have
been acquired for a Public Project. This amount has already
been withdrawn by the applicants. In the enhancement
proceedings, the L.A.R. Court has treated the lands to be
irrigated lands and has awarded an enhancement of
compensation to the tune of Rs.16,160/- per R. In order to
better assess the conclusions of the L.A.R. Court, at a prima
facie stage, we have called upon the learned advocate for the
claimants to place before us the evidence that he led, along
with the cross-examination. Accordingly, he has placed on
record his examination-in-chief and his cross-examination (11
pages), which are collectively marked as 'X-1' for identification.
3 904-CA.128-21 & ors..odt
4. We have perused 'X-1'. The applicants have brought on
record the valuation of borewell and pipe line, which are
marked as Exh.107 to 113. He has also produced certain
receipts from the concerned shop indicating that he has sold
Jaggery and Kardi. He has produced sugarcane tax receipts.
He has produced sugarcane tax paid receipts which are at
Exh.57 to 72 and has also produced certificates issued by Sugar
Factories which are marked at Exh.52 to 56. However, in
cross-examination, he has admitted that he does not have any
documentary evidence to indicate that he is a member of any
sugar factory.
5. The learned advocate for the acquiring body submits that
notwithstanding the lifting of the area restrictions permitting
sugarcane growers to supply sugarcane to factories beyond the
limits of the factory which is nearest to their agriculture field, a
sugarcane supplier has to be registered with some sugarcane
factory. Even the 7/12 extract do not indicate that sugarcane
crop was taken by the petitioners/ applicants. It was also
admitted in cross-examination that the sale deeds placed on
record by the applicants were not belonging to their village.
4 904-CA.128-21 & ors..odt
6. In view of the above and to balance the equities, we are
of the considered view that the applicant could be permitted to
withdraw 60% of the amount that is deposited in this Court,
with certain conditions.
7. In view of the above, all these applications for
withdrawal of amount are partly allowed with the following
directions :
(a) The applicants would be permitted to withdraw
60% of the amount deposited in this Court.
(b) They shall tender an affidavit undertaking to the
extent of withdrawing 30% of the said amount
(50% of the amount that we permit him to
withdraw).
(c) The undertaking shall contain a statement that if
the First Appeals' result in an order adverse to
the interest of the applicants, they would re-
deposit the excess amount in this Court within
ten (10) weeks from the date of the judgment.
(d) The remainder 30% (meaning 50% of the
5 904-CA.128-21 & ors..odt
amount that we have permitted him to
withdraw) shall be withdrawn by tendering
security to the satisfaction of the Registrar of this
Court. They will also place on record recent
photographs, proof of their permanent
addressess along with the applications for
withdrawal.
8. Since the appellant has deposited the amount as directed
by this Court, which was a pre condition for staying the
impugned L.A.R. awards, Civil Application Nos.127 of 2021,
128 of 2021, 129 of 2021, 130 of 2021, 131 of 2021 and 132
of 2021 stand allowed and the interim relief granted by this
Court is confirmed till the decision in the first appeals.
In First Appeals
9. Call for Record and Proceedings.
(S. G. MEHARE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
...
vmk/-
