Dismissed

Central Institute of Cotton Research Village Panjari, Nagpur Thr. Its Director v. Sukhdeo Sampatrao Deulkar and Others

Bombay HC5 Dec 2024MCA/845/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Review application by the acquiring authority seeking reduction of enhanced land acquisition compensation, citing lower awards in related appeals. The court noted a contemporaneous sale deed showing higher market value, evidence absent in the other appeals, and dismissed the review for no error apparent on the face of the record.

What the court decided

AI extract

Central Institute of Cotton Research Village Panjari, Nagpur… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:13183

¶2

1 1) MCA 845-24 in FA 1081-14(D).odt

¶3

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

¶4

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 845 OF 2024 IN

¶5

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1081 OF 2014 (D)

¶6

CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF COTTON RESEARCH INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AT VILLAGE PANJARI, NAGPUR THR. ITS DIRECTOR

¶7

...Vs...

¶8

SUKHDEO SAMPATRAO DEULKAR AND ORS.

¶9

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's orders Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶10

Ms. Meghna Munshi, Advocate for applicant. Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Shri A.M. Ghogre, AGP for respondent nos. 2 and 3.

¶11

CORAM: SMT. M.S.JAWALKAR, J.

¶12

RESERVED ON : 29^th NOVEMBER, 2024. PRONOUNCED ON : 05^th DECEMBER, 2024.

¶13

The present review application/petition is filed by the respondent no. 3 in First Appeal No. 1081/2014 (D).

¶14

In spite of service, the respondent no. 3 in First Appeal No. 1081/2014 (D) was failed to appear.

¶15

Now, by way of review application/petition, the applicant seeks to review the judgment dated 31/07/2023 passed in First Appeal No. 1081/2014 on the ground that in other matters arising out of same award i.e. First Appeal Nos. 899/2010, 901/2010, 1017/2010, 1272/2010, 1275/2010 and 1271/2010, the compensation was enhanced to Rs. 1,25,000/- per

¶16

2 1) MCA 845-24 in FA 1081-14(D).odt

¶17

hectare. However, this Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 2,25,000/- per hectare.

¶18

Shri Anand Parchure, learned counsel for the non-applicant no. 1 pointed out that, the judgment passed by this Court is perfectly justified. In view of sale deed dated 24/04/1984 placed on record, wherein the market value of the land was Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre. This sale deed relied on by the applicant is of the same period i.e. the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.

¶19

The learned counsel for the applicant after going through the copy of sale deed fairly conceded that this piece of evidence was not placed before the Court while passing the judgment in First Appeal Nos. 899/2010, 901/2010, 1017/2010, 1272/2010, 1275/2010 and 1271/2010. As such, there is no error apparent on the face of record and the present review application/petition is hereby dismissed .

¶20

(SMT. M.S.JAWALKAR, J.)

¶21

B.T.Khapekar

Central Institute of Cotton Research Village Panjari, Nagpur Thr. Its Director v. Sukhdeo Sampatrao Deulkar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Central Institute of Cotton Research Village Panjari, Nagpur Thr. Its Director v. Sukhdeo Sampatrao Deulkar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rambhau Sahadeo Wankhade vs Awadhut Sahadeo Wankhade and Others

M/S. Radha Madhav Developers, Thr. Authorized Representative, Mr. Rajesh N. Agrawal vs Vinod Kumar S/O. Rajaram Agarwal and Another

Rahul S/O Arun Rahate vs Ankita W/O Rahul Rahate

Abhijit S/O Pandurang Alsi vs Vijay S/O Shridhar Alsi

Sanjay S/O. Prabhakar Tute and Others vs Sanjay S/O. Golaji Jadhav and Another

Munnalal S/O Surajlal Gupta vs Bhaskar S/O Hiraman Titre and Another