Sopan Madhav Ghar v. Midc Through Its Regional Officer Latur And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8722 OF 2015 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST.NO.22056 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2127 OF 2010 Sopan Madhav Ghar, Died L.Rs.
Suresh Sopan Ghar & anr.
...
APPLICANTS
VERSUS
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & anr.
...
RESPONDENTS .....
Shri V.D. Gunale, Advocate for applicants Shri S.S. Dande, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for State .....
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8727 OF 2015 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST.NO.22052 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2131 OF 2010 Maroti Apparao Tele, Died L.Rs.
Kalawati Maroti Tele & ors.
...
APPLICANTS
VERSUS
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & anr.
...
RESPONDENTS .....
Shri V.D. Gunale, Advocate for applicants Shri S.S. Dande, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for State .....
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8721 OF 2015 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST.NO.22062 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2129 OF 2010
Balbhim Nivrutti Tele & ors.
...
APPLICANTS
VERSUS
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & anr.
...
RESPONDENTS .....
Shri V.D. Gunale, Advocate for applicants Shri S.S. Dande, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for State .....
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8720 OF 2015 IN CROSS OBJECTION ST.NO.22076 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2126 OF 2010 Bhagwan Madhavrao Ghar, Died L.Rs.
Gayabai Bhagwan Ghar, Died L.Rs.
Sangita Namdev Shinde & ors.
...
APPLICANTS
VERSUS
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & anr.
...
RESPONDENTS .....
Shri V.D. Gunale, Advocate for applicants Shri S.S. Dande, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for State .....
CORAM:
R.D. DHANUKA AND SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATED:
29th September, 2017.
ORAL ORDER:
1.
By these Civil Applications, the applicants seek condonation of delay of 1647 days in filing the Cross- Objections. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have
perused the averments made in the Civil Applications. No affidavit-in-reply is filed.
2.
In our view, the delay is satisfactorily explained by the applicants in the Civil Applications. Mr. Dande, learned counsel for the acquiring body, however, submits that, if this Court proposes to condone the delay, the applicants shall not be entitled to claim interest for the delayed period. Mr. Gunale, learned counsel for the applicants states that, his clients would not claim interest for the period of delay caused in filing the Cross-Objections if the delay is condoned by this Court. Statement is accepted.
3.
Delay caused in filing the Cross-Objections is accordingly condoned on the condition that the applicants will not claim any interest for the delayed period caused in filing the Cross-Objections. Civil Applications are disposed of in aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.
(SUNIL K. KOTWAL) (R.D. DHANUKA) JUDGE JUDGE fmp/