Executive Engineer Minor Irrigation Division Osmanabad vs Abdul Razzak Chand Patel (Patil) and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Executive Engineer Minor Irrigation Division Osmanabad vs Abdul Razzak Chand Patel (Patil) and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Condonation of delay of 3040 days allowed (civil applications allowed in terms of prayer clause "A"); first appeal admitted and Record and Proceedings called for; respondent/claimant permitted to withdraw 50% of the deposited amount with accrued interest on furnishing an undertaking and 25% on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial), with the balance invested in any Nationalized Bank; ad-interim stay confirmed and the civil application for stay disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 3040 days in preferring the first appeal against the Reference Court award should be condoned. +2 more

Court's answer

There are good grounds for condonation of delay; they are not controverted by the respondents, there are no malafides on the part of the applicant, and money of the public exchequer is involved.

Ratio / Principle

The civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause "A", i.e., the delay of 3040 days is condoned, subject to conditions on release of the deposited amount.

Key takeaways

The respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw 50% of the deposited amount with accrued interest on furnishing an undertaking and 25% on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial); the balance amount shall be invested in any Nationalized Bank.ratio¶¶15
The first appeal is admitted; the same withdrawal permissions (50% on undertaking, 25% on solvent surety, balance invested in a Nationalized Bank) are made applicable, and notice service is waived by counsel for respondent No.1 and the AGP for the State.ratio¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J., 25.06.2025): Allowed the civil applications of the Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Osmanabad for condonation of delay of 3040 days in preferring a first appeal against a Reference Court award of compensation, holding that the grounds were good and uncontroverted, that there were no malafides, and that money of the public exchequer was involved. Permitted the respondent/claimant to withdraw 50% of the deposited Rs.24,95,858/- with accrued interest on furnishing an undertaking and 25% on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial), directing that the balance be invested in any Nationalized Bank. Admitted the first appeal, called for the Record and Proceedings, and confirmed the earlier ad-interim stay since the entire amount under the award stood deposited; the civil application for stay was disposed of.

2025:BHC-AUG:16183

1 943-CA.11455-24 & ors.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

943 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11455 OF 2024 IN FAST/27525/2024 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11456 OF 2024 IN FAST/27525/2024

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION OSMANABAD VERSUS

ABDUL RAZZAK CHAND PATEL (PATIL) AND ORS

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Dande Shrirang Shashishekhar. AGP for Respondent/s-State : Mr. B. A. Shinde. Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. Madake Datta A.

CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 25.06.2025

PER COURT :-

Applicants are seeking condonation of delay of 3040 days in preferring first appeal.

Learned counsel Mr. Dande appearing for applicant would rely upon paragraph Nos.2 to 9 of the application for condonation of delay. He would submit that unreasonable compensation has been granted by the Reference Court. The matter needs to be heard on merits considering repercussions of the public exchequer.

Learned counsel Mr. Madake would oppose the submissions.

2 943-CA.11455-24 & ors.odt

After hearing both the sides, I find that there are good grounds mentioned in the application. Those are not controverted by the respondents. There are no malafides on the part of the applicant in preferring appeal. Mr. Dande, learned counsel for the applicant is right in contending that money of public exchequer is involved. I find it fit to allow the civil application by imposing certain conditions. It transpires from the record that applicant has deposited Rs.24,95,858/-. Part of the said amount can be permitted to be withdrawn on certain conditions.

Civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause “A” on condition that respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount with accrued interest on furnishing undertaking and 25% on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial). Balance amount shall be invested in any Nationalized Bank.

In First Appeal

Admit .

Learned counsel Mr. Madake waives service of notice for

respondent No.1. Learned AGP waives service of notice for respondents/State.

3 943-CA.11455-24 & ors.odt

Call for Record and Proceedings from the concerned Court.

Respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount with accrued interest on furnishing undertaking and 25% on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial). Balance amount shall be invested in any Nationalized Bank.

In Civil Application for Stay

As entire amount under award has been deposited, adinterim stay granted earlier shall stand confirmed.

Civil Application is disposed of.

(SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.)

vmk/-