Disposed

Rajiv L. Sangtani and Ors. v. the Pune Municipal Corporation through Commissioner and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Nov 2019WP/3432/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interim order directs the respondent Pune Municipal Corporation to deposit the balance compensation amount of Rs.52.71 crore with the SLAO until the proposed Special Leave Petition against the impugned order is filed and disposed of by the Apex Court. The deposit is to be made without prejudice to the petitioners' claim for interest.

What did the court decide?

Directorion to deposit balance amount of Rs.52,71,50,268/- with SLAO pending filing and orders on S.L.P.

Rajiv L. Sangtani and Ors. vs the Pune Municipal Corporation… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

P.H. Jayani 06 WPST22120.19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 22120 OF 2019

¶4

Rajiv L. Sangtani and ors. …..Petitioners v/s.

¶5

The Pune Municipal Corporation, Pune and ors. …...Respondents

¶6

Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar, Sr. Counsel with S.R. Ganbawale i/b. Sangramsinh Yadav for the Petitioners. Mr. Abhijit Kulkarni for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. N.K. Rajpurohit, AGP for the State / Respondent Nos.4 to 9.

¶7

CORAM: A.A. SAYED, AND SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.

¶8

DATE : 26^th NOVEMBER, 2019.

¶9

P. C. :-

¶10

. It is not in dispute that the Award was passed as far back as on 22/12/2014 whereby the compensation was fied at Rs.71,55,38,357/-. The Respondent-Corporation had challenged the award by fling a Writ Petition being Writ Petition (St.) No.4858 of 2015 (later numbered WP No.4542 of 2015) interalia contending that the compensation amount cannot eiceed a sum of Rs.18,83,88,089/-. In the said Writ Petition No.4542 of 2015 fled by the Respondent – Corporation, an order came to be passed on 08/10/2015 whereby the Respondent – Corporation was directed to deposit the balance amount of Rs.12,33,48,089/- with the Special Land Acquisition Ofcer-16, Pune, and the Petitioners were

¶11

1/3

¶12

P.H. Jayani 06 WPST22120.19.doc

¶13

permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.18,83,88,089/- (i.e. Rs. 12,33,48,089/- plus Rs.6,50,40,000/- deposited earlier) and the Petitioners were directed to deliver possession of the subject lands to the Respondent – Corporation. The possession of the subject lands were accordingly handed over by the Petitioners to the Respondent – Corporation on 11/03/2016. The said Writ Petition No.4542 of 2018 fled by the Respondent – Corporation came to be dismissed by order dated 25/04/2019.

¶14

We are informed by the learned Counsel for the Respondent – Corporation that the Respondent – Corporation is in the process of fling a Special Leave Petition against the aforesaid order dated 25/04/2019. As stated earlier, the award was passed as far back as on 22/12/2014 whereby the compensation was fied at Rs.71,55,38,357/-. Moreover, the Writ Petition of the Respondent – Corporation challenging the award has also been dismissed as far back as on 24/04/2019.

¶15

In the facts and circumstance of the case, we direct that unless the Respondent – Corporation fle the proposed Special Leave Petition and obtain appropriate orders from the Apei Court, the Respondent – Corporation shall deposit the balance amount of Rs.52,71,50,268/- with the SLAO before the neit date. The deposit

¶16

2/3

¶17

P.H. Jayani 06 WPST22120.19.doc

¶18

would be without prejudice to the claim of the Petitioners for interest.

¶19

Stand over to 27^th January, 2020.

¶20

(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (A.A. SAYED, J.)

¶21

3/3

Rajiv L. Sangtani and Ors. v. the Pune Municipal Corporation through Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv L. Sangtani and Ors. v. the Pune Municipal Corporation through Commissioner and Ors.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dilip Baburao Kothawale Aand Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rajiv L. Sangtani and Ors. vs the Pune Municipal Corporation through Commissioner and Ors.

Dilip Baburao Kothawale Aand Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kiran Nanasaheb Waghere vs the Divisional Commissioner Pune and Ors.

Kiran Nanasaheb Waghere vs the Divisional Commissioner Pune and Ors.