Allowed

Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal Thr Exe Enginner Wan Project Div Shegaon Dist Buldhana v. Ajabrao Manikrao Sabe and Others

Bombay HC23 Oct 2024CAF/1828/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application for condonation of a 76-day delay in filing a first appeal, holding that the delay was not deliberately caused and was in the interest of justice. The appeal was also admitted with notice issued.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 76 days and dismissal of application for condonation of delay. Admission of appeal.

Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal Thr Exe… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 12caf1828.24.odt

¶2

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

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION [CAF] NO.1828 OF 2024 IN

¶4

FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.11262 OF 2024

¶5

[Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal .vs. Ajabrao Manikrao Sabe and others]

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions

¶8

and Registrar's orders

¶9

¶10

Mr. M.A. Kadu, Advocate for Applicant.

¶11

Mr. A.S. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶12

Ms. Hemlata Dhande, AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4.

¶13

CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 23rd OCTOBER, 2024.

¶14

This is an application for condonation of delay of 76 days caused for filing of the appeal. Perused the application.

¶15

Heard the learned advocate for both the sides.

¶16

Considering the reasons stated in the application, the application deserves to be allowed as the delay is not deliberately caused.

¶17

The application is allowed in the interest of justice.

¶18

The delay of 76 days is condoned.

¶19

The application is disposed.

¶20

Civil Application (F) No.3110/2024

¶21

This is an application filed by applicants-respondent nos.1 and 2 for withdrawal of an amount deposited in this court by the appellant as per the award passed by the authority under the Land Acquisition Act. Perused the application.

¶22

2 12caf1828.24.odt

¶23

Heard the learned advocates for both the sides.

¶24

Considering the reasons stated in the application, the application deserves to be allowed. The application is allowed in the interest of justice.

¶25

Registry is directed to pay 50% amount on usual undertaking and 25% amount on execution of solvent surety along with accrued interest thereon to the applicantsrespondent nos.1 and 2.

¶26

The application is disposed.

¶27

First Appeal St. No.11262/2024

¶28

Heard.

¶29

Admit.

¶30

Issue notice to the respondents.

¶31

Mr. A.S. Deshpande, learned advocate waives notice for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶32

Ms. Hemlata Dhande, learned AGP waives notice for respondent nos.3 and 4.

¶33

Call for record and proceedings.

¶34

(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.)

¶35

Gulande

Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal Thr Exe Enginner Wan Project Div Shegaon Dist Buldhana v. Ajabrao Manikrao Sabe and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal Thr Exe Enginner Wan Project Div Shegaon Dist Buldhana v. Ajabrao Manikrao Sabe and Others

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

Maharashtra Elektrosmelt Ltd., Thr. Its Executive Director, Chandrapur vs Smt. Fulbai Wd/O Omprakash Nishad and Others

Narayandasji Jagannathi Lahoti vs Union of India, through General Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai and 3 Others

Radheshyam Ramjeevan Laddha, through Poa Ajay Narayandasji Lahoti vs Union of India, through General Manager, C.S.T. Mumbai and 3 Others

Vidarbha Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal Thr Exe Enginner Wan Project Div Shegaon Dist Buldhana Vs Devidas Namdev Sabe (Died) Thr Lrs Saramdhar Namdev Sabe and Others

Tukaram Jagoba Thakre Vs Sumitra Deoraji Kale and Others

V.I.D.C., through Its Executive Engineer, Amravati Irrigation Division Amravati Vs Pralhad Baban Mohod and Others