Shriram So Vaman Jogdand vs The Executive Officer, Lift Irrigation ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 24255 Bom

Bombay High Court

Shriram So Vaman Jogdand vs The Executive Officer, Lift Irrigation ... on 16 August, 2024

2024:BHC-AUG:18251


                                                  1                      ca 8643.24.odt

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                1033 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8643 OF 2024
                                            IN FAST/3258/2023

                                       Shriram So Vaman Jogdand
                                                 VERSUS
                      The Executive Officer, Lift Irrigation Division Osmanabad And
                                                     Ors
                                                      ...
                     Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Gangakhedkar Shailendra S
                     Advocate for Respondents : Mr. M. C. Swami For R/1
                     Mr. A.V. Lavte AGP for respondent State.
                                                      ...

                                         CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                         Dated    : August 16, 2024

                     PER COURT :-
                     1.    Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective
                     parties.


                     2.    By way of this application, original claimant is seeking
                     withdrawal of amount of compensation deposited in pursuance
                     of the award passed by the Reference Court.


                     3.    Mr. Gangakhedkar, learned advocate appearing for the
                     applicant submits that Reference Court relied upon the
                     previous award in LAR No.671, 310, 672, of 2014 and
                     connected matters fixed rate for compensation amount. Said
                     award have attained the finality.     He would submit that
                     therefore, the challenge so far as quantum of compensation
                     towards land in question is concerned would be sufficed.
                                2                        ca 8643.24.odt

4.     Mr. Gangakhedkar, would submit that even excluding the
compensation towards pipe lines and fruit bearing trees, the
applicant would be entitled to receive the compensation more
than 75% of the award.


5.     Mr. Swami, learned advocate appearing for the appellant
acquiring body do not dispute the aforesaid position as
reflected in paragraph no.27 of the judgment.


6.     Considering the submissions advanced and the fact that
claimants have lost their agricultural land and consequential
income, it would be appropriate to permit them to withdraw
75% of the compensation amount subject to certain conditions
keeping in view interest of the acquiring body.             Hence,
following order.
                            ORDER

i. Civil application is partly allowed.

ii. The applicants are permitted to withdraw 75% of the total compensation amount deposited by the acquiring body.

iii. 50% of the compensation amount be disbursed to the claimants on furnishing usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.

iv. In addition to the aforesaid amount, claimants would be entitled to withdraw 25% of the compensation amount deposited with the Registry of this Court on furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Registrar (J) of this Court.

3 ca 8643.24.odt

v. Civil application stands disposed off.

( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. ) ...

aaa-