Bombay High Court
EKNATH PUNJAJI NAWALE DIED THR LRSversusThe state of Maharashtra Through SLAO Special Unit Aurangabad
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The Court allowed partial withdrawal of the newly deposited amounts in the same proportion as earlier order but refused to limit the withdrawal to applicants Nos. 2 and 3.
Summary
The applicants sought permission to withdraw amounts they had deposited with the Court in connection with pending appeals, requesting the same withdrawal proportions previously ordered (50% on undertaking, 25% on surety, 25% to remain in fixed deposit). They also contended that four of the applicants had relinquished their shares in favour of applicants Nos. 2 and 3, and therefore only those two should be allowed to withdraw. The Court examined the relinquishment deed dated 09.02.2024 and found it limited to future enhancements, not to the amount already enhanced by the Reference Court. Consequently, the Court rejected the request to restrict withdrawal to Nos. 2 and 3, but upheld the earlier withdrawal scheme for the newly deposited sums of Rs. 22,00,000 and Rs. 1,02,12,000. The Court ordered that 50% of each new deposit be withdrawn on furnishing a usual undertaking, 25% on furnishing a solvent surety, and the remaining 25% to be kept in a nationalised bank until the appeals are decided, and disposed of the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicants may withdraw the newly deposited amounts in the same proportion as earlier ordered.
- Whether the relinquishment deed by certain applicants bars them from withdrawing any share, limiting withdrawal to applicants Nos. 2 and 3 only.
Subjects
- withdrawal of deposited amount
- relinquishment deed
- surety
- fixed deposit
- civil application
- High Court of Bombay
- appeal deposit
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44126-DB
1 7-CA 10783-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10783 OF 2026
IN FA/2441/2023
Eknath Punjaji Nawale (Died) Through L.Rs.
Bhimabai Eknath Nawale And Others .. Applicants
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra
Through S.L.A.O. Special Unit Aurangabad
And Another .. Respondents
Mr. Abhijit B. Kale, Advocate for Applicants.
Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for Respondent No. 1.
Mr. S. V. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 24th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned advocate for the applicants, learned A.G.P
and learned advocate for respondent No. 2/appellant.
2. This application is filed seeking withdrawal of the amount
deposited by the respondent No. 2/appellant in appeal in the
office of this Court. Initially, the appellant had deposited some
portion of the amount i.e. Rs. 5,80,00,000/- on 20.12.2023. After
depositing said amount an application was made by the present
2 7-CA 10783-2026.odt
applicants for withdrawal of the said amount. This Court by order
dated 20.12.2023 had allowed the applicants to withdraw 50% of
the deposited amount alongwith accrued interest on furnishing
usual undertaking before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
25% of the amount out of the deposited amount was allowed to
be withdrawn with accrued interest on furnishing solvent
surety/security to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar
(Judicial) of this Court. Remaining amount was directed to be
deposited in a fixed deposit in Nationalized Bank till the appeals
are pending.
3. It is thereafter on 22.09.2025 an amount of Rs. 22,00,000/-
was deposited and on 28.07.2026 remaining amount of
Rs. 1,02,12,000/- was deposited as in the meantime there was
dispute raised about initially deposited amount of
Rs. 5,80,00,000/-. Now, an application is made seeking permission
to withdraw the amount in the same proportion in which earlier
amount was directed to be withdrawn.
4. It is further case of the present applicants that the applicant
Nos. 1, 4 to 6 have relinquished their share in favour of applicant
Nos. 2 and 3. Therefore, prayer is made to allow only applicant
3 7-CA 10783-2026.odt
Nos. 2 and 3 to withdraw the amount of the share of all the
applicants. It is submitted that, a relinquishment deed is executed
by other applicants on 09.02.2024 relinquishing their right in
favour of applicant Nos. 2 and 3. The learned advocate also
submits that in Civil Application No. 10260/2025 this Court had
allowed the application in terms of prayer clause (B) wherein, it is
already prayed that the amount be released only in favour of
applicant Nos. 2 and 3.
5. This Court has seen the copy of relinquishment deed dated
09.02.2024 which was annexed to the earlier Civil Application No.
10260/2025. From the wording we find that those applicants had
relinquished only the amount which will be enhanced in the
appeals filed by the applicants for enhancement. There is no
wording showing that they have relinquished the share in the
amount which is already enhanced by the Reference Court. We,
therefore, find that a request to the extent of allowing only
applicant Nos. 2 and 3 to withdraw the amount cannot be
accepted. However, since already this Court had permitted the
applicants to withdraw the amount to the extent of 75% as then
was deposited in the office of this Court, the present application
4 7-CA 10783-2026.odt
also stands allowed partly.
6. The applicants are entitled to withdraw 50% of the amount
deposited on 22.09.2025 and 28.07.2026 alongwith accrued
interest on furnishing usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the
learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. 25% of the amount
alongwith accrued interest is allowed to be withdrawn on
furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the learned
Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. Remaining 25% of the amount
shall be deposited in any Nationalized Bank till the appeals are
decided.
7. With this, the civil application stands disposed of.
( JITENDRA JAIN, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )
P.S.B.
Checking your session…