Bombay High Court
The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, ... vs Baban S/O Anna Namde And Others on 29 November, 2023
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi
2023:BHC-AUG:24960
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9069 OF 2021
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO.3171 OF 2023
The Chief Officer,
Municipal Council, Ambad,
Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna,
Through Vikram Maruti Mandurke,
Age 33 yrs., Occ. Service,
R/o Ambad, Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna.
... Applicant
... Versus ...
1 Baban Anna Namde,
Age 48 yrs., Occ. Agri.,
2 Madhav Anna Namde,
Age 43 yrs., Occ. Agri.,
3 Ashok Anna Namde (Died)
Since deceased through his legal representatives -
A) Ganga w/o Ahok Namde,
Age 39 yrs., Occ. Agri.,
B) Akash Ashok Namde,
Age 18 yrs., Occ. Education,
C) Tushar Ashok Namde,
Age 13 yrs., Occ. Education,
U/G of Ganga w/o Ashok Namde,
3A) to 3C) are r/o Near Omshanti College,
Shivaji Nagar, Ambad, Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna.
2 CA_9069_2021
4 Shivling Anna Namde,
Age 38 yrs., Occ. Agri.,
5 Siddhu Anna Namde,
Age 36 yrs., Occ. Agri.,
Applicant Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 are
r/o Om Shanti Nagar, Ambad,
Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna.
6 The State of Maharashtra
Through The Collector,
Jalna.
7 The Sub Divisional Officer,
Ambad,
Near old Tahsil Office,
Ambad, Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna.
... Respondents
...
Mr. S.S. Patunkar, Advocate h/f J.P. Legal Associates for applicant
Miss. Pradnya Talekar, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5
Mr. S.D. Ghayal, AGP for respondent Nos.6 and 7
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 13th OCTOBER, 2023
PRONOUNCED ON : 29th NOVEMBER, 2023
3 CA_9069_2021
ORDER :
( PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)
1 Present application has been filed seeking stay to the execution
of Judgment and Award dated 25.10.2018 passed in Land Acquisition
Reference No.794/2013 by learned 4 th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division,
Jalna of which Special Darkhast No.148/2019 is pending. It will not be out
of place to mention here that the appeal was filed along with application for
condonation of delay and it came to be allowed on 19.08.2023.
2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. S.S. Patunkar holding for J.P. Legal
Associates for applicant, learned Advocate Miss. Pradnya Talekar for
respondent Nos.1 to 5 and learned AGP Mr. S.D. Ghayal for respondent Nos.6
and 7.
3 The learned Advocate for the appellant - acquiring body
submitted that the learned reference Court has enhanced the compensation
manifolds as compared to the compensation granted by Special Land
Acquisition Officer. The said enhancement is illegal and by not taking into
consideration the principles laid down in various authorities by this Court as
well as Hon'ble Supreme Court. There was no evidence adduced by the
original claimants which could justify their demand for enhancement in the
compensation. In order to support his submissions he has relied on the
4 CA_9069_2021
decision in Jawajee Nagnatham vs. Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad
(A.P.) and others [1994 (4) SCC 595], Ramlal Deochand Shah vs. State of
Maharashtra and another [AIR 2013 SC 3452] and Cement Corporation of
India Ltd. vs. Purya and others [(2004) 8 SCC 270]. The learned trial Judge
has wrongly relied on sale transaction and had not taken into consideration
as to whether it was admissible or not. Now, the appeal is admitted and even
substantial amount has been paid to the claimants, but as regards further
difference is concerned, stay deserves to be granted, otherwise it would
amount to injustice to acquiring body.
4 Per contra, the learned Advocate appearing for the original
claimants objected the application and submitted that even as per the due
amount i.e. amount that was awarded by Special Land Acquisition Officer of
Rs.2,00,00,000/- ought to have been deposited. What has been granted or
allowed to be withdrawn to the claimant is Rs.1,03,00,000/-. The land
owned by the claimants has been acquired and for which the acquiring body
was duty bound to pay just compensation. Special Land Acquisition Officer
has given meagre amount and, therefore, further stay need not be granted.
The appellant should be directed to deposit the remaining amount and the
original claimants be allowed to withdraw the same.
5 Here, it will not be out of place to mention that it appears that
5 CA_9069_2021
the original claimants are not even satisfied with whatever enhancement that
has been granted by the learned reference Court. They have also filed appeal
for enhancement in the compensation. Here, in this appeal the acquiring
body has come with a case that whatever enhancement has been granted is
beyond the legal scope and, therefore, this Court while condoning the delay
asked the registry to tag the present appeal with the appeal that has been
filed by the claimants. Definitely, it appears that as compared to the amount
that was granted by Special Land Acquisition Officer the enhancement made
by the reference Court is manifolds. It would be the question to be
determined, as to whether the said enhancement is justified or not, which can
be taken at the stage of final hearing. Since the appeal filed by the original
claimants is also pending and the present appeal is also admitted as well as
the fact that substantial amount has already been deposited and withdrawn
by the claimants, it is necessary to stay the execution of the impugned
Judgment and Award till the decision of the appeal. If the stay is not granted
it will cause injustice to the acquiring body. This Court must keep some
amount with it so that an assurance is given to the appellant - acquiring body
that in case their appeal gets allowed, then the said amount to be
safeguarded, otherwise it would become difficult to the acquiring body to
recover the said amount. Mere undertaking will not solve the problem and,
therefore, application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly following order is
6 CA_9069_2021
passed.
ORDER
1 Application stands allowed.
2 There shall be stay to the impugned Judgment and Award dated
25.10.2018 passed in Land Acquisition Reference No.794/2013 and the
further proceedings in Special Darkhast No.148/2019 pending before 4 th
Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Jalna, during the pendency and decision of
First Appeal No.3171 of 2023.
3 Application stands disposed of accordingly.
( ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )
agd
Signed by: Amol G. Donge
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 29/11/2023 15:39:51
