Bombay High Court

BHARAT RAMNIWAS CHANDAK.versusTHE ADMINISTRATOR CIDCO, CIDCO OFFICE, JALNA ROAD, AURANGABAD AND ORS.

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Holding

The applicant is permitted to withdraw 10% of the deposited amount with interest, subject to furnishing a bank guarantee for half of that amount and an undertaking for the other half.

Summary

The applicant, Bharat Ramniwas Chandak, sought to withdraw 10% of the compensation amount deposited by CIDCO after CIDCO appealed a 2019 award and deposited 60% of the payable sum with interest. The applicant argued that, based on the shareholding arrangement, he is entitled to a 10% interest in the compensation. The court noted a prior order (Civil Application No.13381 of 2022) that allowed other beneficiaries to withdraw 22.5% of the deposited amount subject to a bank guarantee and an undertaking. Relying on that precedent, the court partially allowed the present application. The applicant may withdraw the 10% amount with interest, provided he furnishes a bank guarantee for half of the withdrawn sum and an undertaking for the remaining half. The order also clarifies that failure to provide the guarantee will not bar disbursement of the balance if an undertaking is given.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to withdraw 10% of the amount deposited by CIDCO as compensation.
Whether the withdrawal can be conditioned on furnishing a bank guarantee for half the amount and an undertaking for the remaining half.

Subjects

civil appeal
compensation
withdrawal
bank guarantee
CIDCO
shareholding
stay of execution
interest

Judgment

                                                  14-sr917-CA.10427.2026.odt


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

              917 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10427 OF 2026
                         IN FAST/10139/2020

                     Bharat Ramniwas Chandak.
                                VERSUS
          The Administrator, CIDCO, CIDCO Office, Jalna Road,
                         Aurangabad And Ors.

                                   ----
Mr.R.P.Totala, Advocate for applicant
Mr.S.V.Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent no.1
Mr.S.P.Sonpavale, AGP for respondent no.2
                                   ----

                         CORAM :      AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
                         DATE  :      SEPTEMBER 09, 2026
ORDER :-

            Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and award dated

24.09.2019, passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad

in L.A.R. No.458 of 1998, the acquiring body – CIDCO has filed the First

Appeal.   In the appeal while securing stay      to the execution and

operation of the impugned award, the acquiring body - CIDCO has

deposited 60% of the entire payable award amount with interest in this

court pursuant to the order passed by this court. Now, this application

is filed for withdrawal of 10% of the deposited amount since the

applicant hold 10% share in the total compensation.
                                    2                   14-sr917-CA.10427.2026



2.          Mr.Totla, learned advocate for the applicant describes

bifurcation of shareholding of all the beneficiaries at paragraph no.9

of his application.   He would submit that respondent nos.3 to 5

jointly hold share for 22.5%; respondent no.6 hold share of 22.5%;

respondent no.7 also holds share of 22.5%; and respondent nos.8

and 9 jointly hold share of 22.5%. He would submit that as per the

agreement between the parties and also with CIDCO the applicant is

entitled for 10% interest in the amount of compensation. He would

point out the order dated 16.02.2024 passed by this court in Civil

Application No.13381 of 2022 in the present First Appeal. It appears

from clause II of the operative order that applicant nos.1 and 2

therein were allowed to withdraw 22.5% while applicant nos.3 and 4

were jointly allowed to withdraw 22.5% of the amount deposited, on

condition to furnish bank guarantee to the extent of half of the

amount which they were allowed to withdraw and balance 50%

amount was allowed to be withdrawn on furnishing undertaking.


3.          Mr.Deshmukh, learned advocate appearing for appellant

– CIDCO would fairly submit that in terms of the order cited by the

applicant a suitable order could be passed in this matter also.
                                      3                   14-sr917-CA.10427.2026



4.          Considering above, I allow the application in the following

terms :-


(I)         The application stands partly allowed.


(II)        The applicant is permitted to withdraw 10% of the

amount deposited by the acquiring body/appellant in this court with

interest accrued thereon. It is clarified that withdrawal shall be

subject to furnishing bank guarantee for half of the amount today

permitted to be withdrawn and on furnishing undertaking to the

satisfaction of learned Registrar (Judicial) of this court for remaining

half amount.


(III)       It is further clarified that if the applicant fails to furnish

the bank guarantee for half of the amount, Registry shall not deny

disbursement of the balance half portion if the applicant furnishes

undertaking in terms of today’s order.




                                  [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
                                ………..


KBP

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…