Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Chh Sambhaji Nagar v. Shri Nikhil Jadhav And ANR.
951 CA NO. 1109 OF 2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 951 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1109 OF 2026 IN FAST/31126/2025 Shri Nikhil Yuvraj Jadhav
VERSUS
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Through Its Divisional Controller, Divisional Office ...
Mr. Kakasaheb B Jadhav, Advocate for Applicant Mr. D S Bagul, Advocate for Respondent No.1 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11996 OF 2025 IN FAST/31126/2025 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11994 OF 2025 IN FAST/31126/2025 ....
CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 29.01.2026 PER COURT :- APPLICATION FOR STAY This is an application seeking stay to the execution of the impugned judgment and award.
The learned advocate for the applicant / appellant submits that the entire amount as per the impugned judgment and award is deposited in this Court.
In view of the above, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause 'C' and disposed of.
(( 2 )) APPLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF AMOUNT This is an application seeking permission to withdraw the amount deposited in this Court pursuant to the award. Heard the learned advocates for both sides.
Learned advocate for respondent No.1 strongly opposed the application.
4.
Perused the application. For the reasons stated therein and considering the arguments of both the sides, it would be proper to partly allow the application. Hence, the following order: ::ORDER::
a.
The application is partly allowed.
b.
The applicant is permitted to withdraw 50% of the amount out of the amount deposited by the appellant in this court, with accrued interest thereon, on furnishing usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. Further 25% of the amount with accrued interest thereon is allowed to be withdrawn on furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
(( 3 )) c.
Registry is directed not to insist for the actual valuation of the property of the surety.
APPLICATION FOR DELAY Heard the learned Advocates for the parties.
This is an application for condonation of delay of 32 days caused in filing the first appeal.
The learned Advocate for respondent No.1 strongly opposed the application and submitted that there is no sufficient reason to condone the delay.
4.
Perused the application. For the reasons stated therein, the application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice as the delay is neither deliberate nor intentional. Hence, the following order:
::ORDER::
a.
Civil Application is allowed and disposed of. b.
The delay of 32 days caused in filing the first appeal is condoned.
(( 4 )) FIRST APPEAL Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 26.03.2026.
Mr. Kakasaheb B. Jadhav, learned Advocate waives service of notice for Respondent No.1.
Call Record and Proceedings.
[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] HRJadhav