Girish Murlidhar Pande vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Girish Murlidhar Pande vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim relief: compensation amount not to be disbursed without the leave of the Court; MSRDC added as Respondent No.5; notice returnable on 19.06.2024; detailed family tree to be filed before the returnable date, failing which the interim relief shall stand vacated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation amount for the land under acquisition should be disbursed despite the unresolved question of shares among the heirs, given the contention that the property is ancestral and no suit for partition and separate possession is pending. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the compensation amount has not been disbursed, it shall not be disbursed without the leave of the Court (interim restraint).

Ratio / Principle

If there is any dispute as regards shares of the parties or apportionment of the compensation amount, the matter has to be referred for a decision to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated (per Section 19(C)(4) of the Maharashtra Highways Act, akin to Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act).

Key takeaways

A detailed family tree indicating even the shares of the deceased daughters Rajabai and Sushilabai shall be placed on record before the returnable date, failing which the interim relief shall stand vacated.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order — Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), Writ Petition No. 3648 of 2024 (Girish Murlidhar Pande v. State of Maharashtra), dated 22.04.2024, Per Court (Ravindra V. Ghuge & R.M. Joshi, JJ.). In a writ petition concerning acquisition of what is contended to be ancestral property, the Court noted that Section 19(C)(4) of the Maharashtra Highways Act, akin to Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, requires any dispute as to shares of parties or apportionment of compensation to be referred to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction within whose limits the land is situated. Pending a detailed family tree showing the shares of all heirs of Vitthalrao Rangrao Pande (including deceased daughters Rajabai and Sushilabai), the Court restrained disbursement of the compensation amount without its leave, directed that the family tree be filed before the returnable date (19.06.2024) failing which the interim relief would stand vacated, permitted addition of MSRDC as Respondent No.5, and issued notice with the AGP waiving service for Respondent Nos.1–3.

1

12wp3648o24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

12 WRIT PETITION NO. 3648 OF 2024

GIRISH MURLIDHAR PANDE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Shri Vaibhav Dhage, Advocate i/by Shri Hande Avinash D., Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R.K. Ingole, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3/State.

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & R.M. JOSHI, JJ.

DATE :- 22^nd April, 2024

Per Court :-

Leave to add the Maharashtra State Road

Development Corporation (MSRDC), as Respondent No.5. Addition be carried out within one week.

Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 19.06.2024. The learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.

The Petitioner was directed to submit a family tree before us. What is placed before us is one branch of the family. Vitthalrao Rangrao Pande has 07 children, out of which, three are sons and four are daughters. Two daughters, namely, Rajabai and

2 12wp3648o24

Sushilabai have passed away. We need a detailed family tree to indicate even the shares of Rajabai and Sushilabai, considering the contention that the property under acquisition is an ancestral property and there is no suit pending for partition and separate possession.

We have perused Section 19(C)(4) of the Maharashtra Highways Act, which is akin to Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act. If there is any dispute as regards shares of the parties or apportionment of the compensation amount, the

matter has to be referred for a decision to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated.

In view of the above, as we are informed that the compensation amount has not been disbursed, the same shall not be disbursed without the leave of the Court.

A detailed family tree shall be placed on record before the returnable date, failing which the interim relief shall stand vacated.

kps ( R.M. JOSHI, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )