Bombay High Court
Ashok S/O Mawanji Narewad vs State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 22 November, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
40. CAF 235 of 2021.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO.235/2021
IN
FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.25587/2019
Ashok s/o Mawanji Narewad
...Versus...
State of Maharashtra, through the Collector, Yavatmal and others
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
Shri K.S. Narwade, Advocate for applicant
Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 3
Shri K.R. Lule, Advocate for respondent no.2
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 22/11/2022
1. The civil application seeks condonation of delay
of 4319 days in filing the first appeal against the judgment of
the Reference Court. Though a statement is made in para 4 of
the application regarding waiver of interest for the period of
delay, the Hon'ble Apex Court in New Okhla Industrial
Development Authority Vs. Rameshwar @ Ramesh Chandra
Sharma (Dead) Through Legal Heir and another, 2022 SCC
OnLine SC 1599, has held as under :-
"10. However, at the same time the acquiring body
and the beneficiary of acquisition shall not be saddled
with the liability of statutory benefits and the interest
40. CAF 235 of 2021.odt
which may be available under the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 for the delayed period. In the present case
the delay of 22 years can be said to be a substantial
delay. However, as the claimants are held to be entitled
the enhanced amount of compensation, in the facts
and circumstances of the case, the High Court can be
said to be justified in condoning the delay. However, at
the same time, the High Court has erred in awarding
other statutory benefits and interest for the delayed
period. To saddle with the liability to pay statutory
benefits and interest for the delayed period upon the
beneficiary/acquiring body would be a financial
burden upon the public body and it may increase the
project cost which shall be against the public interests.
It cannot be disputed that the liability towards the
statutory benefits and the interest under the Act, 1984
would be a huge liability considering the interest at
the rate of 15% per annum, solatium, price rise etc.
Therefore, while condoning the delay and enhancing
the amount of compensation at par with other land
owners, the High Court ought not to have saddled the
liability upon the appellant to pay statutory benefits
and the interest payable under the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 for the delayed period . To the aforesaid
extent the impugned common judgment and order
passed by the High Court is required to be modified
and the present appeals are required to be partly
allowed to the aforesaid extent.
40. CAF 235 of 2021.odt
11. In view of the above and for the reasons stated
above all these Appeals Succeed in part. The
impugned common judgment and order passed by the
High Court passed in respective appeals is hereby
partly allowed to the aforesaid extent denying the
statutory benefits and the interest which may be
payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the
period between the judgment and award passed by the
Reference Court i.e. 15.12.1993 till the respective first
appeals were filed after curing the defects. Meaning
thereby the original land owners/claimants shall not
be entitled to any statutory benefits including the
interest payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
on the enhanced amount of compensation for the
period between 15.12.1993 till the respective first
appeals after curing the defects were filed."
2. In view of the above and in view of what has been
held in Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (Dead) through L.Rs. Vs.
The Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, 2019 SCC
OnLine SC 1611, the delay is condoned subject to the
condition that the original land owner/claimant (appellant
herein) shall not be entitled to any statutory benefits including
the interest payable under the Land Acquisition Act on the
enhanced amount of compensation for the period of delay. The
civil application is accordingly allowed, subject to what is
stated above.
40. CAF 235 of 2021.odt
FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.25587/2019
1. Assistant Government Pleader Mrs. Mayuri
Deshmukh appears for the respondent nos.1 and 3 and
Advocate Shri K.R. Lule appears for the respondent no.2.
2. Shri Narwade, learned counsel for the appellant
submits that the matter is covered by the judgment of this
Court in Ganesh Dattatray Bhusale (Deceased) through L.Rs.
Sulochana Ganesh Bhusale and others Vs. The State of
Maharashtra, through Collector, Yavatmal, Distt. Yavatmal
[First Appeal No.479/2015, dated 09/07/2019] (pg.24) and
Ashokkumar s/o Deobarao Naik Vs. The State of Maharashtra,
through Collector, Yavatmal and others [First Appeal
No.1330/2008, dated 03/10/2019] (pg.29), considering
which, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
respondent nos.1 and 3 and the learned counsel for the
respondent no.2 to examine this position and make a
statement in that regard.
3. List the matter on 29/11/2022.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Digitally signed bySHAILENDRA
SUKHADEORAO WADKAR
Wadkar
Signing Date:23.11.2022 14:46
