Bombay High CourtCA/6446/2014disposed offdismissed for default

Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation Aurangabad v. The State Of Mah And ORS

2017-11-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice K. K. Sonawane2 pages

{1} 930-935 sr.no..odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 930 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6446 OF 2014 IN FA/4367/2008 GODAWARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AURANGABAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS ...

Advocate for Applicant : MR. B.R. Survase Adv. for Respondents: Mr. F.K. Patel h/f Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar 931 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6447 OF 2014 IN FA/4364/2008 932 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6448 OF 2014 IN FA/4365/2008 933 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6450 OF 2014 IN FA/4366/2008 934 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6466 OF 2014 IN FAST/1449/2008 WITH CA/1524/2008 IN FAST/1449/2008 WITH CA/1525/2008 IN FAST/1449/2008 WITH CA/1526/2008 IN FAST/1449/2008 935 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6467 OF 2014 IN FAST/1441/2008 WITH CA/1518/2008 IN FAST/1445/2008 WITH CA/1519/2008 IN FAST/1445/2008 WITH CA/1520/2008 IN FAST/1445/2008 WITH CA/1521/2008 IN FAST/1441/2008 WITH CA/1522/2008 IN FAST/1441/2008 WITH CA/1523/2008 IN FAST/1441/2008 WITH CA/1527/2008 IN FAST/1345/2008 WITH CA/1528/2008 IN FAST/1345/2008 WITH CA/1529/2008 IN FAST/1345/2008 WITH CA/6474/2014 IN FAST/1445/2008 WITH CA/6476/2014 IN FAST/1345/2008 CORAM : K.K. SONAWANE, J.

DATE : 30th November, 2017.

PER COURT:

1] Heard Mr. Survase, learned counsel for applicant-Acquiring Body and learned AGP for respondent - State of Maharashtra and learned counsel Mr. F.K. Patel, h/f. Mr. P.R. Karneshwarkar, Advocate for the

{2} 930-935 sr.no..odt respondent/original claimant. Perused the applications for requisite direction from this court to transpose the State of Maharashtra as coappellant in these appeals. Learned AGP fervidly contends that he has no any instruction to join the proceedings as co-appellant accompanied with Acquiring Body in these matters.

Learned counsel for applicant produced the letter issued by the Government of Maharashtra addressed to Executive Director of the appellant Corporation. There are references that the State of Maharashtra should be one of the co-applicant alongwith Acquiring Body. But, the State of Maharashtra did not prefer any application to join the present proceedings as an co-appellant instead of as party respondent into the matter. The learned AGP also contends that he has no instruction about the same. In such circumstances, respondent- State of Maharashtra could not be compelled to join the proceedings of appeal as co-appellant alongwith appellantAcquiring Body. In such circumstances, the application being inept deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, applications stand dismissed. [K.K. SONAWANE] JUDGE.

grt/-