Disposed

The State of Mah and Ors. v. Bapurao Balwantrao Mohite

Bombay HC1 Aug 2021FA/2162/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This National Lok Adalat order disposed of multiple land acquisition appeals between the State of Maharashtra and original claimants. The court held that awards should be modified to reflect interest guidelines from the Full Bench in Kailash Rangari and the Supreme Court in Ramesh Meshram.

What did the court decide?

Awards modified to include interest per Kailash Rangari and Ramesh Meshram precedents; deposited amounts to be transmitted to Claimants; security released; appeals disposed of as withdrawn.

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Bapurao Balwantrao Mohite — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

107-117(b).odt

¶2

IN THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT PRESIDED OVER BY HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. N. LADDHA, HELD ON 01.08.2021,

¶3

AT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES SUB-COMMITTEE AT AURANGABAD

¶4

107 FIRST APPEAL NO.2162 OF 2008

¶5

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

BAPURAO BALWANTRAO MOHITE

¶8

AND

¶9

108 FIRST APPEAL NO.2163 OF 2008

¶10

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

RAJARAM PANDHARINATH SHAHERWALE

¶13

AND

¶14

109 FIRST APPEAL NO.2164 OF 2008

¶15

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER VERSUS

¶16

NAMDEO SHANKAR SHAHERWALE AND ANOTHER

¶17

AND

¶18

110 FIRST APPEAL NO.2165 OF 2008

¶19

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER VERSUS

¶20

BARKU BHIKA MOHITE AND ANOTHER

¶21

AND

¶22

111 FIRST APPEAL NO.2167 OF 2008

¶23

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS VERSUS

¶24

VASANTGIR RAMGIR GIRI and ANOTHER

1 of 5

107-117(b).odt

AND

112 FIRST APPEAL NO.2168 OF 2008

¶29

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS

¶30

VERSUS LALGIR GULABGIR GIRI and OTHERS

¶31

AND

¶32

113 FIRST APPEAL NO.2169 OF 2008

¶33

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶34

VERSUS BANDU SHEKU JANGLE THROUGH LRs

¶35

AND

¶36

114 FIRST APPEAL NO.2170 OF 2008

¶37

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS VERSUS BRAMHAGIR PREMGIR GIRI

¶38

AND

¶39

115 FIRST APPEAL NO.2171 OF 2008

¶40

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS

¶41

VERSUS

¶42

GULAB DAGDU SHAHERWALE

¶43

AND

¶44

116 FIRST APPEAL NO.2172 OF 2008 WITH FA/2173/2008

¶45

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS

¶46

VERSUS

¶47

PREMGIR HIRAGIR GIRI L.RS. BRAMGIR PREMGIR GIRI and ANOTHER

¶48

AND

¶49

117 FIRST APPEAL NO.2174 OF 2008

¶50

2 of 5

¶51

107-117(b).odt

¶52

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHERS VERSUS LALGIR GULABGIR GIRI and OTHERS

¶53

AGP for Appellant – State in All above Appeals : Mr. A. M. Phule / Mr. S. S. Dande Advocate for Acquiring Body in All above Appeals : Mr. T. B. Bhosale

¶54

O R D E R

¶55

These appeals are placed before today’s Lok Adalat with the consent of the parties.

¶56

Mr. A. M. Phule / Mr. S. S. Dande, learned AGP for the appellant / State submitted that the Government of Maharashtra, vide Government Resolution No.Sankirna-2014/ pra.kra.4/Bham1/A-4, dated 3^rd November, 2016 with Government Corrigendums dated 23^rd February, 2017 and 13^th August, 2018 to the said Government Resolution, took decision to settle the appeals by accepting the market rates determined by the Reference Court, which are within parameters set out in the Government Resolution. The statement made by the learned AGP is in consonance with the recitals in the Government Resolution. In turn, these appeals are fit to dispose of before the Lok Adalat.

¶57

The learned Advocate for appellant further submits that as far as the interest U/s. 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “Act”) awarded by the SLAO as well as Reference Court shall be as per verdict by the Full Bench in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari, 2016 (4) ALL MR 513 and the Hon’ble Single Judge in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Ramesh Tukaram Meshram – 2018 (1) ALL MR 645. In turn, they submit that the impugned Award may be

¶58

3 of 5

¶59

107-117(b).odt

¶60

modified to that extent as far as interest is concerned.

¶61

The learned AGP for the State submits that amount in these appeals has been deposited and later on withdrawn by the original claimants by obtaining orders from this Court. He further submits that after modification of award, if partial payment is required to be made by the appellant in the light of preposition of law in the case of Kailash Rangari & Ramesh Meshram (supra) , they shall deposit within six months from today and original claimants / respondents are at liberty to withdraw it. The statement is accepted. The appellant shall deposit the amount, if any, if required, within six months from today and claimants are at liberty to withdraw it.

¶62

Having considered the legal position ruled in both the aforesaid judgments, the impugned Award/s may be modified, if required, in the tune of judgment in the case of Kailash Rangari (supra).

¶63

The amount deposited, if any, in this Court or which would be deposited, if required, be transmitted to the concerned Reference Court with further directions to disburse the said amount to the claimants and excess amount, if any, to the Acquiring Body / State of Maharashtra. If original claimants are entitled to any amount in the light of this order and if it is not deposited as ordered above, they are at liberty to file execution proceeding.

¶64