Disposed

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd. v. Raju Jethanand Wahbi and Anr.

Bombay HC9 May 2024FA/755/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First appeal against a garnishee order making MSRDC liable to satisfy the decretal amount in a land acquisition reference. On the State's affidavit stating the liability lay on the Appellant, the Court directed deposit of the entire decretal amount with interest within six weeks and permitted withdrawal by Respondent No.1.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to deposit decretal amount with interest within six weeks; Respondent No.1 permitted to withdraw on furnishing undertaking/indemnity bond; no costs.

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

3 fa755-24.doc

¶2

Digitally signed by TRUSHA TRUSHA TUSHAR TUSHAR MOHITE MOHITE Date: 2024.07.04 13:41:47 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO.755 OF 2024. WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.7977 OF 2024

¶5

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd... Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Raju Jethanand Wahbi and Anr.

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

Mr.Gautam Ankad, Mr.Mutahhar Khan, Mr.Joshua D’souza a/w Mr.Chirag Sancheti i/b M/s.Bulwark Solicitors, Advocates for the Appellant.

¶10

Mr.Sachin S. Punde a/w Mr.Manjit Thakur, Advocate for Respondents No.1.

¶11

Mr.A.R.Patil, Addl. G.P. for the Respondent No.3.

¶12

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: JULY 3, 2024

¶13

P. C.

¶14

Admit.

¶15

With the consent of the parties, Appeal is taken up for hearing

¶16

and final disposal.

¶17

Page 1 of 3 JULY 3, 2024

¶18

Mohite

¶19

3 fa755-24.doc

¶20

The First Appeal has been filed challenging the Order dated 4^th March 2024 (“Impugned Order”) passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alibag, whereby the Appellant is made a garnishee for satisfaction of the decretal amount in L.A.R. No.261 of 2021 passed in the Judgement dated 8^th September 2023 (“Judgement”). The Appellant has challenged the Impugned Order on several grounds.

¶21

The Public Works Department, State of Maharashtra (Respondent No.3 herein) has filed its Affidavit in reply dated 18^th June 2024, in this First Appeal stating that it is the liability of the Appellant to make the payment under the Judgement dated 8^th September 2023. Since the Appellant is an undertaking of the State Government, the payment will have to be paid by the Appellant.

¶22

In these peculiar facts and circumstances, the Appellant is directed to deposit the entire decretal amount under aforesaid Judgement and Award dated 8^th September 2023 along with interest upto the date of deposit / realization, in the Reference Court / Executing Court. This deposit will be made within a period of six weeks from today. Respondent No.1 is permitted withdraw the amount so deposited after furnishing usual

¶23

Page 2 of 3 JULY 3, 2024

¶24

Mohite

¶25

3 fa755-24.doc

¶26

Undertaking / Indemnity Bond before the Reference Court. It is made clear that this Order will not be used as a precedent and is without prejudice to all rights and remedies that may be available to the Appellant in law, particularly since the Appellant was not a party to the original reference order.

¶27

The Appeal is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.

¶28

In view of the disposal of the Appeal, any Interim Applications pending therein, do not survive and the same are disposed of accordingly.

¶29

This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

¶30

[FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.]

¶31

Page 3 of 3 JULY 3, 2024

¶32

Mohite

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd. v. Raju Jethanand Wahbi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd. v. Raju Jethanand Wahbi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Satish Y. Acharya vs Union of India

Nirali Parekh and 2 Ors. vs Kishore Vrajlal Soni

Rohan S/O Vimal Agrawal vs the Union of India Thr Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Anr.

Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited vs Union of India

Vitthal Chintaman Paradkar vs Reji Varghese S/O. P.J.Varghese

Classic Shelcon Pvt. Ltd. vs Modern Usha Colony Co-Operative Housing Ltd.