Dismissed

G.M.I.D.C. Aurangabad Thr Its Exe. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Latur v. Dnyanoba Ramji Ahilwad and Others

Bombay HC4 Sept 2019CA/1401/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the civil applications seeking transposition of the State of Maharashtra as a co-appellant. Holding that the acquiring body's interest differed from the State's and that the State was already a respondent, the Court found no merit.

What did the court decide?

Applications for transposition of the State of Maharashtra as a co-appellant rejected.

G.M.I.D.C. Aurangabad Thr Its Exe. Engineer… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

(Order) (1) C.A. No. 01404 of 2016

¶2

& Group

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶4

914 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1404 OF 2016 IN FAST/4558/2015 WITH CA/1394/2016 IN FAST/4377/2015 WITH CA/1398/2016 IN FAST/4554/2015 WITH CA/1396/2016 IN FAST/4562/2015 WITH CA/1403/2016 IN FAST/4566/2015 WITH CA/1401/2016 IN FAST/4570/2015 WITH

¶5

CA/1400/2016 IN FAST/4574/2015 WITH CA/1397/2016 IN FAST/4578/2015 WITH CA/1405/2016 IN FAST/4582/2015 WITH CA/1402/2016 IN FAST/4586/2015 WITH CA/1393/2016 IN FAST/4590/2015

¶6

GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, AURANGABAD, THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, LATUR

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SHIVRAJ VITTHAL BANDEWAD AND ANOTHER

¶9

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. R.D. Biradar Advocate for Respondents viz. claimants : Mr. Eknath Irale Patil AGP for Respondent viz. State : Mr. R.B. Bagul

¶10

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

¶11

 DATE : 04TH SEPTEMBER 2019

¶12

ORAL ORDER:

¶13

01.By the present applications, the applicant
- acquiring body is seeking transposition of the
non-applicant viz. State of Maharashtra as co-
appellant in the first appeals.

¶14

02.Learned Advocate for the appellant -
applicant is not showing any provision in respect
of transposition of the State of Maharashtra as co-

¶15

(Order) (2) C.A. No. 01404 of 2016

¶16

& Group

¶17

appellant in the first appeals.

¶18

03.Learned Advocate appearing for the
applicant - acquiring body has tried to rely on the
notification issued by some Deputy Secretary of the
State Government. However, it is to be noted that
the interest of the acquiring body cannot be said
to be similar that of State though the acquisition
might have been made and the steps were taken by
the State for the purpose of project which has then
been handed over to the Corporation. The
Corporation has been established under the
provisions of an Act and therefore, as per the
object for which the Corporation was established by
separating it from the Government, it cannot be
stated that now the interest of the State is
equivalent to the Government. Learned Advocate
appearing for the applicant / appellant - acquiring
body is not Government Pleader/Assistant Government
Pleader and therefore, he cannot represent the
State to whom he seeks to add as co-appellant.
Under such circumstance, there is no merit in the
applications for transposition.

¶19

04.Further, the State has been made respondent
in the appeals; it cannot be stated that the
appeals have been instituted by a wrong appellant
taking into consideration the fact that the

¶20

(Order) (3) C.A. No. 01404 of 2016 & Group concerned authority of the appellant was a party before the reference Court. Under such circumstance, the applications are hereby rejected.

¶21

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi )
 JUDGE

¶22

...........

¶23

puranik / CA1404.16etc

G.M.I.D.C. Aurangabad Thr Its Exe. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Latur v. Dnyanoba Ramji Ahilwad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.M.I.D.C. Aurangabad Thr Its Exe. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Latur v. Dnyanoba Ramji Ahilwad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Executive Engineer Medium Project Division Osmanabad Vs Yusuf Mahetab Ali Arab and Another

The Executive Engineer Medium Project Division Osmanabad Vs Ashkar Mahetab Ali Arab and Others

The Executive Engineer Medium Project Division Osmanabad Vs Devidas Ambadas Nalwade and Others

Babulal Manik Shaikh Vs Babu Maruti Samundrawane and Others

G.M.I.D.C. Aurangabad Thr Its Exe Engineer Minor Irrigation Division Latur Vs Raghunath Jivanaji Budhware and Another

G.M.I.D.C. Aurangabad Thr Its Exe. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Latur Vs Prakash Dattatraya Budhware and Others