Executive Engineer, Urdhava Pravara Canal Div. Sangamner v. Sukhdeo Savleram Lawre And ANR

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 910 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2723 OF 2015 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, URDHAVA PRAVARA CANAL DIVISION, GHULEWADI THR GMIDC AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER ....Appellant

VERSUS

SAMBHAJI HAUSABAL WAMAN .....Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 334 OF 2020 IN FA/2723/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11975 OF 2019 IN FA/2727/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7441 OF 2020 IN FA/3075/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7440 OF 2020 IN FA/3076/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7443 OF 2020 IN FA/3078/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11981 OF 2019 IN FA/2724/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11976 OF 2019 IN FA/3079/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3731 OF 2020 IN FA/2735/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11980 OF 2019 IN FA/3080/2015

(2) WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11977 OF 2019 IN FA/2733/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7442 OF 2020 IN FA/3077/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11978 OF 2019 IN FA/2725/2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11979 OF 2019 IN FA/3082/2015 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 2730 OF 2015 Mr. A. N. Gaddime, Advocate for the applicant Mr. D. A. Bide, Advocate for the respondent Mrs. Chaitali Choudhari-Kutti, APP for the respondents/State CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 13th AUGUST, 2025 P. C.

1.

The learned advocates for both the sides inform that since the appeals are already restored by the Lok Adalat, applications for restoration of the appeals are become infructuous and seeks leave to withdraw the applications for restoration.

2.

In view of above, the applications for restoration

(3) stands disposed off as withdrawn.

3.

These appeals are filed in the year 2015. At the time of admission, this court had granted stay to the effect and execution of the impugned judgments and awards. These appeals are placed wrongly before the Lok-Adalat alongwith group of other first appeals and were wrongly disposed off by the Lok-Adalat. Later on, it realized that all these appeals were wrongly tagged with the said group.

4.

Now difficulty expressed by the appellant is that earlier appeals were dismissed and though those are restored there is no specific order as regards stay and for that reason the executing court is proceeding withexecution.

5.

It is clarified that first appeals are restored at original position.

6.

In view of above, stay granted earlier by this court in

(4) the said first appeals to continue.

7.

List the first appeals in due course.

8.

Remove from board.

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.] VishalK/910fa2723.15