Allowed

Shri Prashant S/O Vilas Raut v. the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Yavatmal and 2 Others

Bombay HC4 Jan 2024CAF/13/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Nagpur allowed an application for condonation of a 293-day delay in filing a first appeal against a reference court award. The court set aside the land acquisition benefits and interest for the delayed period subject to the appeal's outcome.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 293 days condoned; appeal registered; caveat regarding deprivation of interest on enhanced compensation if appeal allowed.

Shri Prashant S/O Vilas Raut vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:195

¶2

1 3 caf13.24.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 13 OF 2024 IN

¶5

FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 9123 OF 2020

¶6

PRASHANT S/o VILAS RAUT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF MAH., THRU. THE COLLECTOR, YAVATMAL AND OTHERS

¶9

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order

¶10

Mr. Pravin P. Deshmukh, Advocate for the appellant/applicant. Mr. H. D. Dubey, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2 Mr. M. A. Kadu, Advocate for respondent no.3

¶11

CORAM : G. A. SANAP, J. DATE : JANUARY 04, 2024.

¶12

Heard learned advocates for the parties.

¶13

Mr. H.D. Dubey, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶14

Mr. M. A. Kadu, learned advocate waives service of notice on behalf of respondent no.3.

¶15

This is an application for condonation of 293 days delay caused in filing appeal against impugned judgment and award, dated 05.09.2019 passed by the Reference Court. The reasons have been stated in the application.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondents, relying upon a decision in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs. Rameshwar @ Ramesh Chandra Sharma (Dead), through Legal Heir and another (2022 SCC Online SC 1599) , submits that delay may be condoned, subject to

¶17

2 3 caf13.24.odt

¶18

condition that the original land owners/claimants/ appellants herein shall not be entitled to get any statutory benefits, including the interest payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the enhanced amount of compensation for the delayed period.

¶19

Learned advocate for the applicant/appellant submits that the Court may pass an appropriate order.

¶20

In view of the above, the application is allowed. Delay of 293 days caused in filing appeal stands condoned. 8. It is made clear that the original land owners/ claimants/appellants herein shall not be entitled to get any statutory benefits, including the interest payable under the Land Acquisition Act on the enhanced amount of compensation for the delayed period of 293 days, in case the appeal is allowed.

¶21

The appeal be registered.

¶22

The application stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶23

FIRST APPEAL (ST.) No. 9123 of 2020

¶24

Heard.

¶25

ADMIT.

¶26

Mr. H. D. Dubey, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶27

Mr. M. A. Kadu, learned advocate waives service of notice on behalf of respondent no.3.

¶28

Call for the record and proceedings.

¶29

Office objections, if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

¶30

3 3 caf13.24.odt

¶31

Paper book be filed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt the record and proceedings.

¶32

If the paper book is not filed within the said period, then the appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Diwale

¶35

Signed by: DIWALE Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 06/01/2024 12:35:40

Shri Prashant S/O Vilas Raut v. the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Yavatmal and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Prashant S/O Vilas Raut v. the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Yavatmal and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Union of India, General Manager South Central Railway, Secundarabad Vs Smt. Sindhutai W/O Atmaram Kotkar and Others

Mirabai Wd/O Mahadeo Rechankar and Others Vs Manjulabai Wd/O Nanaji Rechankar and Others

Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corp. Thr. Exe. Engineer, Amravati Irrigation Dept., Amravati Vs Saiyyed Hussain S/O Saiyyed Jafar and Others

Smt. Savitabai Wd/O Vasant Waghade and Others Vs Shafik S/O Nizam Dunge and Others

Shri Prashant S/O Vilas Raut vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Yavatmal and 2 Others

Vasantrao Naryanrao Joshi vs Sukhdeo Shankar Sabale and Other