← Library
Bombay High CourtCA/1424/2017disposed offdismissed for default

Khevaji Sakharam Bhangre Dead Thr. Lrs Tukaram And Another v. The Executive Engineer, Laghu Patbandhare Vibhag No.2,Ghulewadi Under Gmidc Aurangabad And Another

2017-02-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.K. Jadhav3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 982 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1420 OF 2017 IN FAST/15780/2015 WITH CA/8079/2015 IN FAST/15713/2015 WITH CA/8080/2015 IN FAST/15713/2015 WITH CA/8081/2015 IN FAST/15792/2015 WITH CA/8082/2015 IN FAST/15792/2015 WITH CA/8083/2015 IN FAST/15786/2015 WITH CA/8084/2015 IN FAST/15786/2015 WITH CA/8085/2015 IN FAST/15780/2015 WITH CA/8086/2015 IN FAST/15780/2015 WITH CA/8087/2015 IN FAST/15798/2015 WITH CA/8088/2015 IN FAST/15798/2015 WITH CA/1423/2017 IN FAST/15786/2015 WITH CA/1424/2017 IN FAST/15792/2015 WITH CA/1425/2017 IN FAST/15713/2015 WITH CA/1426/2017 IN FAST/15798/2015 WITH CA/1493/2017 IN FAST/15792/2015 MARUTI HANUMANTA BHANGARE DEAD THR LRS AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, LAGHU PATBANDHARE VIBHAG NO.2,GHULEWADI UNDER GMIDC AURAN with 984 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.

FAST/15745/2015 WITH CA/1517/2017 IN FAST/15770/2015 WITH CA/1518/2017 IN FAST/15751/2015 WITH CA/1519/2017 IN FAST/15770/2015 HAUSHIRAM DHONDIRAM WEDE

VERSUS

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LAGHU PATBANDHARE VIBHAG NO.2,GHULEWADI UNDER GMIDC AURAN ...

Advocate for Applicants : Shinde S.k.

Advocate for Respondents : B. A. Shinde For R/1 ...

CORAM : V.K. JADHAV, J.

DATE : 10-02-2017.

P.C. :

1.

Considering the challenge made to the judgment and award passed by the tribunal and for the reasons stated in the applications, the applicants are permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount deposited before this court on furnishing undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial). The applicants are further permitted to withdraw 25% of the amount on furnishing solvent surety and balance 25% amount be invested in F.D.R. in any nationalized bank till disposal of the appeals. Civil applications are accordingly disposed of.

2.

Heard both the sides. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that, due to administrative difficulties the appeals could not be filed within limitation. The learned counsel for the respondents has strongly resisted the applications. In view of the above submission and for the reasons stated in the civil applications, delay caused in filing the first appeals is hereby

condoned. Civil applications are allowed and are accordingly disposed of.

3.

Heard both the sides. Learned counsel for the respondents-acquiring body has no objection if the applications for bringing original claimants on record are allowed. In view of the above and for the reasons stated in the applications, the same are allowed in terms of prayer clause and are accordingly disposed of. 4.

The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the entire amount is deposited as directed by this court. Stay applications are accordingly disposed of.

5.

Heard. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 10.03.2017. Learned counsel Shri S.K. Shinde waives for respondent claimants. Call for record and proceedings. (V.K. JADHAV) JUDGE mub