Allowed

Panchphula Rangnath Mane v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector, Osmanabad and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Jan 2024CA/471/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Aurangabad allowed three civil applications seeking permission for the applicant to withdraw 25% of compensation deposited in court, contingent on furnishing solvent security with four weeks time granted.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw 25% amount with accrued interest on furnishing solvent security; four weeks time granted.

Panchphula Rangnath Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 471 OF 2024 IN FA/4476/2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 473 OF 2024 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 472 OF 2024 IN FA/4478/2016

¶3

PANCHPHULA RANGNATH MANE VERSUS

¶4

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, OSMANABAD AND ORS

¶5

Mr. L. C. Patil, Advocate for the applicant Mr. S. V. Hange, AGP for the respondent/State Mr. R. A. Tambe, Advocate for respondent No. 3.

¶6

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 11^th JANUARY, 2024

¶7

P.C. :-

¶8

This Court by order dated 20^th March, 2019 had allowed the applicant to withdraw 50% of the compensation amount deposited in this Court along with accrued interest, 25% was permitted to be withdrawn subject to filing of the solvent security within a period of 12 weeks. Remaining 25% of the amount was directed to be invested in the fixed deposit in any nationalized bank till final disposal of the appeal. Pursuant to this order, the applicant withdrew 50% of the amount by giving an undertaking. He, however, could not furnish solvency for the purpose withdrawal of remaining 25% of amount. The order therefore came to be modified on 13^th September, 2019 directing withdrawal of 50% amount.

¶9

1 of 2

¶10

912.ca471.24.odt

¶11

The applicant now claims that he is in a position to furnish solvent security for the purpose of withdrawal of 25% of the amount. Considering the request and since this Court has already allowed the applicant to withdraw 25% amount with solvent surety, this Court finds no reason to dismiss the applications. Hence, applications are allowed.

¶12

The applicant is at liberty to withdraw 25% amount along with accrued interest thereon, deposited in this Court by giving solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant seeks four weeks time to comply with this direction. Time is granted.

(R. M. JOSHI, J.)

ssp

2 of 2

912.ca471.24.odt

Panchphula Rangnath Mane v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector, Osmanabad and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panchphula Rangnath Mane v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector, Osmanabad and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Executive Engineer Kukadi Canal Construction Division, Kolwadi Division Vs Chandrakala Dinkar Borade and Another

Vyankat Rangrao Kohale (Died) Thr Lrs Ramesh Vyankatrao Kohale and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector Latur and Anr.

Suryakant Vithhal Ghadge Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suresh Yashwant Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector, Osmanabad and Ors.

Narayan Rangnath Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector, Osmanabad and Ors.

Kondiba Maruti Magar Died Thr Lrs Balasaheb Kondiba Magar Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Collector, Osmanabad and Ors.