Asruba Hariba @Haribhau Mundhe And ORS v. The G.M.I.D.C., Thr The Ex. Engineer, Beed Irrigation Division, Beed And ORS

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5206/2020 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.34160/2018 ASRUBA HARIBA @ HARIBHAU MUNDHE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE G.M.I.D.C., THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BEED IRRIGATION DIVISION, BEED AND OTHERS.

.....

Shri S.S. Dargad, Advocate h/f Shri A.V. Thombre, Advocate for applicants. Shri A.M. Gaikwad, Advocate for appellant.

Shri V.M. Kagne, AGP for the State.

.....

CORAM: V.L. ACHLIYA, J.

DATE: 08.09.2020 PER COURT :

1] The applicants - claimants have moved this application seeking withdrawal of amount of Rs.16,07,160/- deposited by the appellant - acquiring body.

2] Heard learned counsel for the applicants - claimants and learned counsel representing the appellant - acquiring body. 3] In brief, it is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the award passed by the Reference Court is not

- 2 - sustainable in law. The enhancement of compensation is excessive and above 10 times the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Ofcer. It is submitted that the Land Acquisition Ofcer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.345/- per Aare. The Reference Court has enhanced the same to Rs.3750/- per Aare. In that view, the enhancement of compensation is more than 10 times. It is further submitted that the SLAO has awarded compensation of Rs.77,000/- on account of fruit bearing trees, which has been enhanced to Rs.7,75,000/-. It is further submitted that separate compensation cannot be awarded on account of fruit bearing trees if the compensation is awarded considering the land as irrigated. In this background, the learned counsel submits that the appellant has good case to succeed in appeal.

4] On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicants - claimants submits that the compensation determined is based upon the evidence adduced in the case. The Reference Court has considered the sale instances. It is further submitted that though the appellant is directed to deposit the amount in terms of award passed by the Reference Court, the deposit of amount is only to the extent of 50% of the amount in terms of the award. In this background, the learned counsel submits that the applicants deserve to be permitted to withdraw the entire amount deposited.

- 3 - 5] On due consideration of the submissions advanced in the light of challenge raised in the appeal and the enhancement of compensation being 10 times more than the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Ofcer, I am of the view that there is arguable case to be considered in the appeal. In order to protect the interest of the appellant, request for withdrawal of entire amount cannot be granted. Accordingly, following order is passed.

O R D E R

A] The applicants - claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount to the extent of 50% of the amount deposited by appellant - acquiring body on furnishing undertaking to the efect that in the event the award is set aside or modifed, the applicants - claimants shall redeposit the amount within eight weeks from the date of such order.

B] After making payment to the extent of 50%, the balance amount be invested in fxed deposit with State Bank of India initially for a period of three years with standing instructions to renew the same till further orders from the Court.

C] Payment be made to the applicants - claimants by transferring the amount in their individual savings bank

- 4 - accounts as per the particulars to be furnished by the applicants.

D] Civil application is disposed of in above terms. (V.L. ACHLIYA, J.) ndk/c89201.doc