Disposed

The State of Mah v. Mohd Shukur Ismail

Bombay HC13 Aug 2022FA/2782/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A National Lok Adalat in Aurangabad disposed of multiple first appeals filed by the State of Maharashtra against land acquisition claimants. The appeals were withdrawn in accordance with a Maharashtra Government Resolution regarding the settlement of compensation.

What did the court decide?

The appeals were disposed of as withdrawn. Claimants were permitted to withdraw deposited amounts with interest, or claim amounts non-deposited within six months of the order.

The State of Mah Vs Mohd Shukur Ismail — Bombay HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

C10t1o17State-FA-Latur

¶2

IN THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT PRESIDED OVER BY HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE HELD ON 13TH AUGUST, 2022.

¶3

AT THE HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES SUB-COMMITTEE, AURANGABAD

¶4

10 FIRST APPEAL NO.426 OF 2003

¶5

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

SITARAM MARUTI SURNAR.

¶8

WITH

¶9

FIRST APPEAL NO.424/2003

¶10

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

MASNA MALARI DEVKATE AND OTHERS

¶13

WITH

¶14

FIRST APPEAL NO.427/2003

¶15

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶16

VERSUS

¶17

SAMBHA MALHARI DEVKATE

¶18

 WITH

¶19

 FIRST APPEAL NO.554/2003

¶20

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶21

VERSUS

¶22

VITHAL LAXMAN UPARWAD

¶23

 WITH

¶24

FIRST APPEAL NO.406/2003

¶25

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶26

VERSUS

¶27

VIKRAM DEVRAO DEVKATE AND ANOTHER

¶28

WITH

¶29

FIRST APPEAL NO.428/2003

¶30

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶31

VERSUS

¶32

RUKMAJI GOVINDRAO DEVKATE

¶33

WITH

¶34

FIRST APPEAL NO.435/2003

¶35

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶36

VERSUS

¶37

ATMARAM MASANA DEVKATE

¶38

WITH

¶39

11 FIRST APPEAL NO.442 OF 2003

¶40

WITH

¶41

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3754/1996 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 442/2003
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO. COLLECTOR.

¶42

VERSUS

¶43

PRALHADRAO DAGADUSAHEB KADAM.
WITH

¶44

Page 1 of 3

¶45

C10t1o17State-FA-Latur

¶46

12 FIRST APPEAL NO.449 OF 2003
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3756/1996 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 449/2003

¶47

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO.COLLECTOR.

¶48

VERSUS
PRABHU BABURAO KALE.

¶49

WITH

¶50

13 FIRST APPEAL NO.488 OF 2003
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
VERSUS
NARAYAN D KALE
WITH

¶51

14 FIRST APPEAL NO.1226 OF 2007

¶52

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶53

VERSUS
GUNDUSING DHONDUSING THAKUR
WITH
15 FIRST APPEAL NO.2232 OF 2008

¶54

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶55

VERSUS

¶56

KASHINATH ANANDRAO PATWARI
WITH

¶57

16 FIRST APPEAL NO.2781 OF 2008

¶58

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
VERSUS
SHYAM SHIVAJIRAO DESHPANDE
WITH
17 FIRST APPEAL NO.2782 OF 2008

¶59

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
VERSUS
MOHD SHUKUR ISMAIL

¶60

Mr A M Phule, AGP for Appellant-State

¶61

Mr. Avinash Kamble, Sub Divisional Officer, Ashti-Latur present for acquiring Body.
Mr. M L Darashiv, Mr. V. D. Gunale, Mr. P. K.Joshi, Mr. A.R. Borulkar, Mr. C.R.
Deshpande, Ms. Patil Mr. P. G. Rodge, Advocates for the respective claimants

¶62

O R D E R

¶63

All these appeals are placed before this Lok-Adalat by the Appellant-State.

¶64

Mr. A. M. Phule, learned AGP for the appellant-State submitted that all

¶65

these appeals are covered by the Government Resolution No. Sankirna- 2014/pra.

¶66

Page 2 of 3

¶67

C10t1o17State-FA-Latur kra.4/Bham-1/A/4 dated 3rd November, 2016 with Government Corrigendum dated 23rd February, 2017 and 13th August 2018 to the said Government Resolution. Thus, these appeals can be withdrawn as per the policy decision taken by the Government of Maharashtra.

¶68

3. The learned AGP for the appellant-State submitted that in some of the
appeals, entire compensation amount has been deposited and in some appeals, the
amount is yet to be deposited.

¶69

4. Under the circumstances, if the claimants have not withdrawn the amount
in the appeals wherein it is deposited, then they are permitted to withdraw the same
along-with accrued interest thereon till date. In case of appeals wherein the
compensation amounts are not yet deposited, the amount shall be deposited within
a period of six months along-with accrued interest as awarded by the Reference
Court and the respondents/claimants are at liberty to withdraw the same.

¶70

5. Accordingly, all these appeals stand disposed of as withdrawn. No order as

¶71

to costs.

¶72

6. Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶73

7. The Court fee refund certificate be issued as per Rules.

¶74

(R. M. DESHMUKH)(S. G. SHETE )(SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE,J.)
AdvocateDistrict Judge Head of the Panel
Member(Retd.)
Member

¶75

Date: 13.08.2022

¶76

Place: Aurangabad

¶77

JPC

¶78

Page 3 of 3

The State of Mah v. Mohd Shukur Ismail

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Mah v. Mohd Shukur Ismail

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Mahadeo Kalyan Taware and Anr.

Badamrao S/O. Eknathrao Thote Vs Abasaheb S/O. Vishwasrao Chavan and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs Udhav Haribhau Panchal and Others

Shabbirkhan Ayubhkhan Pathan Thr His Next Friend Brother Najrkha Ayubkha Pathan Vs Rakesh Kautik Thakre and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Thros.Collector and Another Vs Balwantrao Narayanrao Mhaske.

State of Maha Vs Shaikh Turab Shaikh Chand