Dismissed

Rajkumar Ramchandra Varma and Ors. v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Latur and Anr.

Bombay HC28 Mar 2012CA/1477/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Batch of civil applications regarding MIDC compensation were rejected. The court held that allowing requests to modify or review previous orders would amount to modification of orders passed by another Division Bench and correctly disposed of the matter by rejecting the applications.

What did the court decide?

Applications rejected; no modification or review of previous orders allowed.

Rajkumar Ramchandra Varma and Ors. Vs Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Latur and Anr. — Bombay HC (2012) — LawSathi Research

¶1

ca1477.12

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1477 OF 2012 IN

¶6

FIRST APPEAL NO.1975 OF 2010

¶7

1) Rajkumar Ramchandra Warma, Age-49 years, Occu:Agril & Business, R/o- Salegalli, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur,

¶8

2) Vijay Ramchandra Warma, Age-44 years, Occu:Agril & Business, R/o- Salegalli, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur,

¶9

3) Sanjay Ramchandra Warma, Age-42 years, Occu:Agril & Business, R/o- Salegalli, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur,

¶10

Through G.P.A. of
Applicants Nos. 1 to 3
Ramchandra s/o Bhavarlal Warma,
Age-73, Occu:Agri,
R/o- Salegalli, Latur,
Tq. & Dist-Latur.
...APPLICANTS.

¶11

 VERSUS

¶12

1) Maharashtra Industrial
 Development Corporation,
 Through Regional Officer,
 M.I.D.C., Latur,

¶13

2) The State of Maharashtra,
 Through Collector, Latur.
...RESPONDENTS.

¶14

ca1477.12

¶15

¶16

 ...
 Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Applicants.
 Shri. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent No.1.
 Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2.
 ...

¶17

WITH
 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1478 OF 2012
 IN
 FIRST APPEAL NO.715 OF 2010

¶18

1) Dagdu Sidram Tele,
 Age-Major, Occu:Agril.,
 R/o-Khandapur,
 Tq. & Dist-Latur.
...APPLICANT.
 VERSUS
1) Maharashtra Industrial
 Development Corporation,
 Through Regional Officer,
 M.I.D.C., Latur,
2) The State of Maharashtra,
 Through Collector, Latur.
...RESPONDENTS.

¶19

 ...
 Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Applicant.
 Shri. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent No.1.
 Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2.
 ...

¶20

 WITH

¶21

ca1477.12

¶22

¶23

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1479 OF 2012 IN

¶24

FIRST APPEAL NO.717 OF 2010

¶25

1) Arvind Vithoba Surkute, Died through lrs. 1-1) Lalita w/o Arvind Surkute, Age-61 years, Occu:Household, 1-2) Sachin s/o Arvind Surkute, Age-35 years, Occu:Agri., 1-3) Balu s/o Arvind Surkute, Age-31 years, Occu:Agri., 2) Sow. Surekha Vipinchandra Gundre, Age-45 years, Occu:Household, 3) Angad Narsing Surkute, Age-43 years, Occu:Agri., 4) Hanmant Narsing Surkute, Age-39 years, Occu:Agri., All R/o- Harangul, Tq. & Dist-Latur. ...APPLICANTS.

¶26

VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through it's Collector, Latur. 2) Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Through Regional Officer, Latur. ...RESPONDENTS.

¶27

ca1477.12

¶28

¶29

 ...
 Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Applicants.
 Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.
 Shri. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent No.2.
 ...

¶30

WITH

¶31

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1480 OF 2012 IN

¶32

FIRST APPEAL NO.713 OF 2010

¶33

1) Balbhim Prabhu Kothimbire, Age-52 years, Occu:Agril, R/o- Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur, 2) Kalyan Bhanudas Devkate, Age-50 years, Occu:Agril, R/o- Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur. ...APPLICANTS.

¶34

VERSUS 1) Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Through Regional Officer, M.I.D.C., Latur, 2) The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Latur. ...RESPONDENTS.

¶35

 ...
 Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Applicants.
 Shri. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent No.1.
 Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2.
 ...

¶36

 WITH

¶37

ca1477.12

¶38

¶39

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1525 OF 2012 IN

¶40

FIRST APPEAL NO.1866 OF 2009

¶41

`1) Chandrakant Limbaji Patil (Died),` `Through L.Rs:`
`1-A) Smt. Usha Chandrakant Patil,` `Age-58 years, Occu:Household,`
`1-B) Shivaji Chandrakant Patil,` `Age-40 years, Occu:Agril.,`
`1-C) Rajkumar Chandrakant Patil,` `Age-36 years, Occu:Agril.,`
`1-D) Sanjay Chandrakant Patil,` `Age-26 years, Occu:Agril.,`
`2) Usha Chandrakant Patil,` `Age-58 years, Occu: Household,`
`3) Shivaji Chandrakant Patil,` `Age-40 years, Occu:Agril.,`
`All R/o- Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur.` `...APPLICANTS.` `VERSUS`
`1) Maharashtra Industrial` `Development Corporation,` `Through Regional Officer,` `M.I.D.C., Latur,`
`2) The State of Maharashtra,` `Through Collector, Latur.` `...RESPONDENTS.`

¶42

ca1477.12

¶43

¶44

 ...
 Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Applicants.
 Shri. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent No.1.
 Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2.
 ...

¶45

 WITH

¶46

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1526 OF 2012 IN

¶47

FIRST APPEAL NO.629 OF 2009

¶48

1) Dattu Vitthal Chame,
 Age- years, Occu:Agril.,
 R/o- Khadgaon, Tq. & Dist-Latur,

¶49

...APPLICANT.

¶50

 VERSUS
1) Maharashtra Industrial
 Development Corporation,
 Through Regional Officer,
 M.I.D.C., Latur,
2) The State of Maharashtra,
 Through Collector, Latur.
...RESPONDENTS.

¶51

 ...
 Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Applicant.
 Shri. S.S. Dande Advocate for Respondent No.1.
 Smt. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2.
 ...

¶52

ca1477.12

¶53

¶54

CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND
 T.V. NALAWADE, JJ.

¶55

 DATE : 28TH MARCH, 2012.

¶56

PER COURT :

¶57

1. Heard Shri. Gunale, learned counsel

¶58

appearing for the Applicants and Shri. Dande,
learned counsel appearing for Respondent M.I.D.C.
and the learned A.G.P. appearing for the State. We
have perused the record placed before us.

¶59

2.We have perused the order passed by the
Division Bench of this Court (CORAM: D.G. KARNIK &
S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ.) dated 16th February, 2012, in
batch of these Civil Applications, which reads as
under:

¶60

"1. Heard counsel.

¶61

2. In our view, allowing of
this application would amount
to modification of the order

¶62

ca1477.12

¶63

¶64

passed by another Division
Bench of this Court. One of the
Honourable members of previous
Division Bench (Honourable Shri
JusticeN.H.Patil)is
available at Aurangabad. In the
circumstances, it would be
appropriate that the matter is
placed before the Bench of
which Honourable Shri Justice
N.H. Patil is a member.

¶65

3. Registry is directed to
place the papers before the
Honourable the Chief Justice
for appropriate directions."

¶66

3.Consequent to the directions of the
Honourable the Chief Justice, the Registry has
placed these Civil Applications before a Bench
presided over by one of us (CORAM: NARESH H.
PATIL, J.). Accordingly, these Civil Applications
were listed before us today.

¶67

4.Shri. Gunale, learned counsel for the

¶68

ca1477.12

¶69

¶70

Applicants submits that in view of the order
passed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.155 of
2010 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19536/2009),
(Mustafa Waliulalh Beg vs. Mah. Industrial
Development Corpn. & Anr.), dated 7th January,
2010, and in view of the order passed by the Apex
Court in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal
(Civil) No(s).10583-10587/2011 (From the judgment
and order(s) dated 06/01/2011 in FA No.2348/2009,
06/01/2011 in FA No.2349/2009, 06/01/2011 in FA
No.2350/2009, 06/01/2011 in FA NO.2351/2009,
06/01/2011 in FA No.2352/2009, 06/01/2011 in CA

¶71

No.18012/2010, 06/01/2011 in CA NO.18013/2010,
06/01/2011 in CA18014/2010, 06/01/2011 in CA No.
18015/2010, 06/01/2011 in CA No.18016/2011 of the

¶72

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD) (BALU CHIMA
KATLE & ANR ETC ETC vs. MAH. INDUSL. DEVT. CORP. &
ANR.), dated 8th November 2011, the Applicants be
permitted to withdraw the remaining amount of the

¶73

enhanced compensation by issuing suitable
directions to the Respondent M.I.D.C.

¶74

ca1477.12

¶75

¶76

5.In substance, the Applicants are seeking

¶77

modification, review of the orders passed by this
Court. We are not convinced to modify, review our
orders. The Applications are rejected.

¶78

[T.V. NALAWADE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.]

¶79

asb/MAR12

Rajkumar Ramchandra Varma and Ors. v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Latur and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar Ramchandra Varma and Ors. v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Latur and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Rangrao Walsange and Ors. Vs the State of Mah

Nitin Yedba Gaikwad, C.No. 4402, Open Prison, Paithan Vs the State of Mah

Rafik Babu Shaikh, C.No. 4321 Open Prison, Paithan Vs the State of Mah

Satish Babulal Parmeshwari Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Yemaji Baburao Lokhare, C.No. 5968, Central Prison, Abad Vs the State of Mah

Yogesh Rajendraprasad Sharma and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra