Bombay High Court
Ramnath Barku Tambe And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 6 November, 2023
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi, Abhay S. Waghwase
2023:BHC-AUG:24036-DB
ca-11783-2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11783 OF 2023
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO.497 OF 2023
1. Ramnath Barku Tambe
Age: 60 years, Occu.: Agri.,
2. Kachru Barku Tambe
Age: 61 years, Occu.: Agri. & Business
Both R/o. Kanchanwadi,
Taluka and District Aurangabad. .. Applicants
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through SLAO Special Unit,
Aurangabad.
2. CIDCO, Aurangabad. .. Respondents
...
Mr. Abhijit Babanrao Kale, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. S. D. Ghayal, AGP for the respondent No.1 - State.
Mr. Shambhuraje V. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.2.
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 20th October, 2023
PRONOUNCED ON : 6th November, 2023
ORDER [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :-
. Present application has been filed by the original
claimants/respondents in first appeal for withdrawal of the amount
deposited by the appellant.
[1]
::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2023 13:28:51 :::
ca-11783-2023.odt
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Abhijit Babanrao Kale for the applicants,
learned AGP Mr. S. D. Ghayal for respondent No.1 - State and learned
Advocate Mr. Shambhuraje V. Deshmukh for respondent No.2.
3. The applicants are the original claimants who had filed Land
Acquisition Reference No.192 of 2013. The learned Reference Court i.e.
10th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Aurangabad decided the reference on
13.06.2022. The appeal is yet to be admitted, however, the application for
condonation of delay in filing first appeal has been allowed and by order
dated 14.12.2022, the stay to the impugned judgment and award has been
granted subject to deposit of 75% of the amount under the award along
with interest accrued theron till date. The time was then got extended. It
appears that when the matter was not on board on 19.08.2023, the amount
was deposited under the orders of this Court. Thus, the position as on
today stands is that amount of Rs.6,53,72,635/- has been deposited in the
present matter.
4. Learned Advocate for the applicants prayed for allowing the entire
amount to be withdrawn, but learned Advocate for the respondents -
appellants submitted that the learned Reference Court has granted
exorbitant compensation. The criteria that is used is also not proper. The
Special Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation at the rate of
Rs.7340/- per R, whereas the Reference Court enhanced it to Rs.1,64,230/-
[2]
::: Uploaded on - 06/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2023 13:28:51 :::
ca-11783-2023.odt
per R and, therefore, the entire amount should not be allowed to be
withdrawn.
5. Apparently it appears that the enhancement is manifold than the
amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Interest of the
acquiring body is also required to be protected till the appeal is decided.
Under the said circumstance, when as per the earlier order passed by this
Court on 14.12.2022 only 75% amount under the award is directed to be
deposited, it would be appropriate to direct the withdrawal of part of the
amount by applicants. Hence, the following order :-
ORDER
I) The application stands partly allowed.
II) The applicants are allowed to withdraw amount of
Rs.4,00,00,000/- equally from the amount that is deposited in the
matter.
[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ]
JUDGE JUDGE
scm
[3]
