Bombay High CourtCA/12434/2016disposed offdismissed for default

The Godavari Marathwada Irrigations Development Corporation Aurangabad Thr The Exe Engineer And ANR v. Subhash Trimbak Tekale

2016-09-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice P.R. Bora3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 7 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12323 OF 2016 IN FAST/22502/2016 WITH CA/12324/2016 IN FAST/22502/2016 WITH CA/12325/2016 IN FAST/22502/2016 WITH CA/12326/2016 IN FAST/24161/2016 WITH CA/12327/2016 IN FAST/24161/2016 WITH CA/12328/2016 IN FAST/24161/2016 WITH CA/12329/2016 IN FAST/24176/2016 WITH CA/12330/2016 IN FAST/24176/2016 WITH CA/12331/2016 IN FAST/24176/2016 WITH CA/12332/2016 IN FAST/24183/2016 WITH CA/12333/2016 IN FAST/24183/2016 WITH CA/12335/2016 IN FAST/24183/2016 THE GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATIONS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,AURANGABAD THR THE EX

VERSUS

NANASAHEB DNYANDEO NAIKNAWARE AND ANR ....

8 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12432 OF 2016 IN FAST/22688/2016 WITH CA/12433/2016 IN FAST/22688/2016 WITH CA/12434/2016 IN FAST/22688/2016 WITH CA/12435/2016 IN FAST/24202/2016 WITH CA/12436/2016 IN FAST/24202/2016 WITH CA/12437/2016 IN FAST/24202/2016 WITH CA/12440/2016 IN FAST/24217/2016 WITH CA/12441/2016 IN FAST/24217/2016 WITH CA/12442/2016 IN FAST/24217/2016 WITH CA/12443/2016 IN FAST/24193/2016 WITH CA/12444/2016 IN FAST/24193/2016 WITH CA/12445/2016 IN FAST/24193/2016 WITH CA/12446/2016 IN FAST/24209/2016 WITH CA/12447/2016 IN FAST/24209/2016 WITH CA/12448/2016 IN FAST/24209/2016 THE GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATIONS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AURANGABAD THR THE EX

VERSUS

SUBHASH TRIMBAK TEKALE ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Tandale P.R.

Mr. SN Morampalle, AGP for Respondents:

Mr. RV Naiknaware, Adv. For orig.Claimants.

----- CORAM : P.R.BORA, J.

DATE :

th September,2016.

PER COURT :

1) Heard. In all these matters, Mr.

Naikware, waives service for original claimants. Service is complete.

2) In view of the fact that the appellant, which is the acquiring body, was not party/respondent in the Reference Application, the applications need to be allowed and the same are accordingly allowed. Civil Applications seeking leave to file appeal are disposed of. 3) Delay of 836 days has occurred in filing the present appeals by the acquiring body. It is contended that the acquiring body was not party respondent in the Reference application and the moment it was noticed that the impugned Awards are passed, necessary steps were taken and promptly the appeals are filed.

The learned Counsel appearing for the original claimants has not seriously disputed for

condoning the delay. The delay is condoned. The appeals be registered in accordance with law. CAs for condonation of delay are disposed of.

4) After registration of the appeals, issue notice of appeals to the respondents. Learned AGP and learned Counsel waive service for respective respondents. Place the matters for admission after four weeks.

5) Execution of the impugned Award shall stand stayed on condition that the appellant/applicant deposits the entire amount under the Award with the interest accrued thereon in this Court within a period of twelve weeks from the date of this order. CA for stay are disposed of.

(P.R.BORA) JUDGE bdv/