Bombay High Court
Shri Gulab S/O Dhonba Rokde vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 22 November, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
37. CAF 3041 of 2019.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO.3041/2019
IN
FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.3277/2019
Shri Gulab s/o Dhonba Rokde
...Versus...
State of Maharashtra through Collector, Nagpur Spl. L.A.O., V.I.D.C-III, Nagpur
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 C.R. Najbile, Advocate for applicant
Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh, AGP for respondent no.1
Shri K.R. Lule, Advocate for respondent no.2
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 22/11/2022
1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader
Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh appears for the respondent no.1 and
Advocate Shri K.R. Lule appears for the respondent no.2.
Shri C.S. Samudra, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 is
absent.
2. The civil application seeks condonation of delay
of 816 days in filing the first appeal. Though a statement has
been made that the applicant/appellant shall not claim
interest on the enhanced compensation, for the delayed
period, the Hon'ble Apex Court in New Okhla Industrial
37. CAF 3041 of 2019.odt
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
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
37. CAF 3041 of 2019.odt
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.
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."
3. In view of the above, the delay is condoned
subject to the condition that the original land owner/claimant
(appellant herein) shall not be entitled to any statutory
37. CAF 3041 of 2019.odt
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. Office to register the
appeal.
FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.3277/2019
1. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable in two
weeks.
2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader
Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh waives service of notice for the
respondent no.1 and Advocate Shri K.R. Lule waives service of
notice for the respondent no.2.
3. The appellant to serve the respondent no.3 by all
modes of service permissible in law within a period of two
weeks. Hamdast granted. The appellant to file the private
paper-book during that period.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Wadkar
Digitally signed bySHAILENDRA
SUKHADEORAO WADKAR
Signing Date:23.11.2022 14:41
