Dismissed

National Highways Authority of India Represented by Project Director a R Yadav v. Nitinchandra Shriram Patil and Another

Bombay HC4 Aug 2023CA/3672/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the applicant's appeal seeking an absolute stay on the execution of an order granting enhanced compensation for land acquisition, noting a prior refusal of stay in the underlying arbitration appeal.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; respondent permitted to withdraw deposited amount upon undertaking.

National Highways Authority of India Represented by Project… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

958-CA-3672-2023

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3672 OF 2023 IN ARBITRATION APPEAL NO. 1 OF 2021

¶5

National Highways Authority Of India Represented By Project Director A R Yadav

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Nitinchandra Shriram Patil And Another

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Mr. D.S. Manorkar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Mukul S. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Mr. P.N. Kutti, AGP for State.

¶11

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

¶12

DATE : 4th AUGUST, 2023

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

This application is filed by the applicant seeking stay

¶15

to the execution of impugned judgment and order dated 06.02.2020, passed by learned Principal District Judge, Dhule, in Civil M.A. No. 169/2013, thereby granting enhanced compensation.

¶16

This Court granted stay to the impugned judgment and order subject to the applicant depositing amount of Rs. 2,47,50,106/-, for which attachment warrant was issued against the applicant by the Executing Court. The applicant has

¶17

Bhagyawant Punde

¶18

{2} 958-CA-3672-2023

¶19

deposited the amount and claimants are permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount, subject to furnishing solvent surety.

¶20

Heard the learned advocate for the applicant, learned advocate for respondent No. 1 and learned AGP for respondent No. 2. Perused the memo of application and the reply filed by respondent No. 1, so also the rejoinder.

¶21

Learned advocate for the applicant prays for making the stay absolute till final decision of the appeal. By pointing out the award of the District Court, he submits that, exorbitant amount is awarded to the claimant, to which he is not entitled. He further submits that the order relied upon by the learned advocate for the respondent/claimant is in respect of different villages and same cannot be relied upon to seek similar relief in the present matter.

¶22

Learned advocate for respondent No. 1/claimant submits that in view of order dated 13.01.2023, passed in arbitration appeal, stay is already refused to the applicant. This order was not brought to the notice of this Court at the time of passing the order on 02.05.2023.

¶23

Bhagyawant Punde

¶24

{3} 958-CA-3672-2023

¶25

This Court (Coram: Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.) on 13.01.2023, passed order in arbitration appeal No. 1/2021, relevant observation is as follows;

¶26

“7. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks stay of the award, however, considering that the same pertains to a compensation payable for land acquisition, I am not inclined to grant any interim stay of the award. Respondent is put to notice that the payment of any compensation will be subject to the final outcome of the appeal”.

¶27

Admittedly, this order is not mentioned in the present civil application and it was also not brought to the notice of this Court by the applicant while obtaining stay on 02.05.2023. In the light of above observation, civil application deserves to be dismissed and same is accordingly dismissed.

¶28

Respondent No. 1/claimant is permitted to withdraw

¶29

the amount on furnishing an undertaking.

¶30

[NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

¶31

Bhagyawant Punde

National Highways Authority of India Represented by Project Director a R Yadav v. Nitinchandra Shriram Patil and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Highways Authority of India Represented by Project Director a R Yadav v. Nitinchandra Shriram Patil and Another

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

Sandip Machindra Karale and Another Vs Machindra Laxman Karale and Others

Ramanlal Virchand Gujarathi Shah Died through Lrs Pramila Ramanlal Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector and Others

Geetanjali Sunil Bilapatte and Another Vs Madhav Laxman Billapatte and Others

Municipal Council Bhusawal through Chief Officer Vs Devesh Ramchandra Yawalkar and Others

M/S Satish Motors Ltd. Vs Lal Bhavats Satish Motors Kamgar Union

Ganpatrao Madhavrao Dase through Gpa Holder Balaji Sambhaji Dase Vs Mahsulnagar Karmachari Sahakari Griha Nirman Sanstha Maryadit Taroda Bk through Its Chairman