Allowed

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur and Others v. Smt. Surekha Prabhakar Nalamwar (Dead) through Lrs. Sanjay S/O Prabhakar Nalamwar

Bombay HC30 Apr 2024CAO/530/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed claimants in five civil applications concerning land acquisition compensation to withdraw 50% of the deposited amount immediately and 25% conditionally, while granting an elderly ill claimant permission to appear via Power of Attorney.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw 50% of deposited compensation with accrued interest immediately, and next 25% with accrued interest on furnishing solvent surety or bank guarantee.

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 932.cao.527.2024

¶2

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

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 527 OF 2024

¶4

IN CROSS OBJECTION ST. NO. 21986 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 328 OF 2022

¶5

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Nagpur

¶6

..vs..

¶7

Mallikarjun Sansthan, Digras, thr. Its President and ors.

¶8

AND

¶9

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 528 OF 2024 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST. NO. 21990 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 331 OF 2022

¶10

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Nagpur

¶11

..vs..

¶12

Nathmal s/o Ramjivan Bhattad and ors.

¶13

AND

¶14

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 530 OF 2024 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST. NO. 22885 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 325 OF 2022

¶15

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Nagpur

¶16

..vs..

¶17

Smt. Surekha Prabhakar Nalamwar (Dead) thr. LR’s

¶18

AND

¶19

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 526 OF 2024

¶20

IN CROSS OBJECTION ST. NO. 21977 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 327 OF 2022

¶21

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Nagpur

¶22

..vs..

¶23

Satish s/o Rikhabchand Mehta and ors.

¶24

AND.

¶25

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 529 OF 2024 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST. NO. 21969 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 326 OF 2022

¶26

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Nagpur

¶27

..vs..

¶28

Sanjay s/o Prabhakar Nalamwar and ors.

¶29

¶30

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

¶31

Court's or Judge's orders

¶32

appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶33

¶34

Shri M.M. Agnihotri Advocate a/w Gunjan Kothari, Advocate for the claimants.

¶35

Shri S.A. Chaudhari, Advocate for the cross-objectors. Shri Narale, Addl.P.P. for the State.

¶36

2 932.cao.527.2024

¶37

CORAM: VINAY JOSHI AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J J. DATED : 30/04/2024.

¶38

Heard.

¶39

These are the applications filed by the Claimants seeking permission to withdraw the amount of compensation, which has been deposited by the Acquiring Body/cross-objector in pursuance of award passed by the Competent Authority under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013.

¶40

It is submitted that initially, the compensation was determined by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) at the rate of Rs.716 per square meter. The Claimants have approached to the Competent Authority with certain sale instances seeking enhancement at the rate of Rs.30,000/per square meter.

¶41

Having regard to the evidence adduced coupled with the documents produced on record, the Competent Authority has fixed compensation at the rate of Rs.1429/- per square meter.

¶42

Learned Counsel appearing for the Acquiring Body Shri Chaudhary would submit that the compensation was doubled already by the Competent Authority. He would submit that the evidence adduced by the Claimants was not properly appreciated and the compensation is granted in too excessive rate.

¶43

The learned Counsel appearing for the Claimants has submitted that the Competent Authority has properly

¶44

3 932.cao.527.2024

¶45

appreciated the documentary evidence. Rather he expressed its dissatisfaction since he has also filed an Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. However, it emerges that before the Competent Authority the Acquiring body though appeared did not contest by way of cross-examination.

¶46

By and large, the compensation amount runs near-about Rs.50 crores in all these matters. Though the rate fixed by the Competent Authority was doubled than the rate awarded by the LAO, however due to solatium, specifically interest and multiplier factor the amount is increased.

¶47

Having regard to the above facts, we deem it appropriate to permit the Claimants to withdraw 50% amount with accrued interest on usual undertaking and next 25% amount along with accrued interest, if any, on furnishing solvent surety or bank guarantee, in the like amount on usual terms and conditions.

¶48

Learned Counsel Shri Kothari would submit that the Claimant in Cross-Objection St. No.21990/2023, is 85 years of age, bed ridden staying at Yavatmal and thus, unable to attend the office of this Court due to health constraints.

¶49

He urged that his personal appearance before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court be exempted.

¶50

Considering the physical condition and ailment of the said Claimant, he is permitted to appear through Power of Attorney in the Family and the Registrar

¶51

4 932.cao.527.2024

¶52

(Judicial) shall affirms the contents through Video conferencing/call, if he desires so.

¶53

The applications stand disposed of in above terms.

¶54

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶55

Trupti

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur and Others v. Smt. Surekha Prabhakar Nalamwar (Dead) through Lrs. Sanjay S/O Prabhakar Nalamwar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur and Others v. Smt. Surekha Prabhakar Nalamwar (Dead) through Lrs. Sanjay S/O Prabhakar Nalamwar

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

Rameshwar S/O Chunnilal Hardule Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary, Home Department, Mumbai 32 and Another

Smt Abha Harshwardhan Verma and 3 Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Sadar Nagpur and Another

Pradeep Madhusudan Jain Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Karanja Distt. Wardha and 1

Jasmika W/O Hitesh Kotangale Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. P. S. Durgapur Near Cpts Colony District Chandrapur and 1

Mukesh @ Chayti Kishor Taywade Vs State of Maharashtra, Thorigh Police Station Officer, Police Station, Sonegaon, Nagpur

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur and Others Vs Mallikarjun Sansthan, Digras Thr. President, Kishor Rambhau Banginwar