Land Acquisition Indira Sagar ... vs Pritesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6819 MP

                                                                        1
                                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                              AT INDORE
                                                                  FA No. 642 of 2020
                                           (LAND ACQUISITION INDIRA SAGAR CANAL AND OTHERS Vs PRITESH AND OTHERS)

                                   Dated : 06-05-2022
                                         Shri Vivek Patwa, learned counsel for the appellant.

                                         Shri Sanjay Agrawal and Anuj Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents.

Anuj Agarwal appeared for Respondent.

Both the parties heard on IA No.1439/2021, which is an application filed by the respondents for recalling and modification of the order dated 14.10.2020.

Counsel for the respondents contended that on 14.10.2020 at the request of

appellant this Court has passed an order that "operation of the impugned order dated 16.12.2019 shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing", but as per the provisions of Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC no order has been made regarding the deposition of the impugned award amount. Counsel for the respondents has also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Malwa Strips Private Limited Vs. Jyoti Limited reported in (2009) 2 SCC 426 and an order passed by this Court in the case of State of M.P. and others Vs. Mahesh in FA No.863/2021 vide order dated 16.2.2022. Hence he prays that the order dated 14.10.2020 whereby execution of the entire award has been stayed is bad in law

and deserves to be recalled. He has also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of PAM Developments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal reported in 2019(8) SCC 112.

Learned counsel for the appellants opposed the application and prays for its rejection by submitting that interim order passed by this Court on 14.10.2020 was duly confirmed on 21.1.2021, which do not call for any intervention in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Order of enhancement cannot be treated as a money decree as the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer is enhanced by the Reference Court. Besides the respondent himself admits that it was the Reader who was aware of the subject land being acquired and are concealing the fact of the Reader being a close relative of the respondent, therefore, FIR has been Signature Not Verified SAN lodged against the concerned Reader and he has been suspended.

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, it is noteworthy that Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2022.05.07 18:26:08 IST

the impugned award is not a money decree. The Land Acquisition Officer, Badwani has passed the impugned award of total amount of Rs.2,79,35,499/-, which was enhanced by the court below up to Rs.6,70,97,857/-.

It is also appeared that in this matter FIR has been lodged against the reader

Shri Babulal Malviya, who was the reader of the concerned SDO (Revenue), Badwani and probably some foul play has been done in the matter.

In view of the aforesaid, this matter is not a routine matter. Under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC the Court has power to direct full or part deposit or to furnish security of the decreetal amount. In the CPC there is no provision for such modification. This petition is not a review petition. It is also noteworthy that order dated 14.10.2020 was made absolute vide order dated 21.1.2021, therefore, there is no need to modify the same.

Accordingly the application filed by the respondent is hereby dismissed.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE

trilok

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2022.05.07 18:26:08 IST