Bombay High Court
PRABHU NANA INGALE DIED THR LRS ANJANA PRABHU INGALEversusThe State of Maharashtra Thr Collector Osmanabad
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The court allowed amendment of the title clause, condoned the delay, made the stay absolute, permitted partial withdrawal of the deposited amount, and set aside any abatement.
Summary
The Executive Engineer filed several civil applications after the sole claimant, Prabhu Nana Ingale, died, seeking to amend the title clause to include his legal representatives. The court granted leave to amend the title clause in all relevant proceedings. It condoned a delay of 2,613 days in filing the first appeal, accepting the applicant's explanation of administrative exigency and noting the respondent's agreement. The earlier stay order was made absolute, and the application for withdrawal of the deposited award amount was partly allowed, permitting withdrawal of 50% immediately and an additional 25% upon furnishing security. Finally, the court allowed amendment of the first appeal’s title clause, set aside any abatement, and directed compliance within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the title clause may be amended to include the legal representatives of a deceased claimant.
- Whether the delay of 2,613 days in filing the first appeal can be condoned.
- Whether the stay previously granted should be made absolute.
- Whether the applicants may withdraw a portion of the compensation amount deposited with the court.
- Whether any abatement in the first appeal should be set aside.
Subjects
- amendment of title clause
- condonation of delay
- stay order
- withdrawal of compensation
- land acquisition
- legal representatives
- abatement
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44206
34-CA.4919.2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4919 OF 2023
IN FAST/11706/2023
The Executive Engineer, Medium Project Division, Osmanabad
vs.
Prabhu Nana Ingale
----
Mr.S.P.Sonpawale, Advocate for applicant
Mr.P.B.Rakhunde, Advocate for respondent
----
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10958 OF 2026
IN FAST/11706/2023
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11206 OF 2026
IN
FIRST APPEAL [ST] NO.11706 OF 2023
Prabhu Nana Ingale Died Thr Lrs Anjana Prabhu Ingale
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Thr Collector Osmanabad
….
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 24, 2026
ORDER :-
In C.A. No.4919 of 2023
At the outset, learned advocate for the applicant submits
that during pendency of this proceedings, the sole claimant – Prabhu is
learnt to be no more. He has list of the legal representatives of
deceased Prabhu. He seeks amendment in the title clause.
2 34-CA.4919
2. Leave to amend the title clause is granted. Amendment
be carried out forthwith.
3. This Civil Application is filed for condonation of delay
caused in filing the First Appeal. There is delay of 2613 days. The
reasons are descriptively rendered in the application. It is submitted
that the delay has arisen on account of administrative exigency.
There is no lethargy or deliberate attempt to cause delay. It is
submitted that the applicant/appellant has good grounds on merit to
challenge the impugned judgment and award. Reliance is placed on
the judgment and order passed by Hon’ble Court in the case of Sheo
Raj Singh (Deceased through LRs.) & Ors. V/s Union of India
and ors. [Civil Appeal No.5867 of 2015 dtd.09-10-2023]. It is
submitted that the acquiring body has deposited the entire award
amount in this court with accrued interest to show bona fide.
4. Learned advocate for the respondent/claimant would
fairly agrees for condonation of delay.
5. In view of the above, the Civil Application stands allowed.
Delay caused in filing the First Appeal stands condoned. Appeal be
registered.
3 34-CA.4919
C.A. No.4920 of 2024 (for stay):-
6. At the outset, learned advocate for the applicants
submits that during pendency of this proceedings, the sole claimant
– Prabhu is learnt to be no more. He has list of the legal
representatives of deceased Prabhu. He seeks amendment in the
title clause.
7. Leave to amend the title clause is granted. Amendment
be carried out forthwith.
8. Mr.Sonpavale, learned advocate for the applicants
submits that pursuant to the order of this court, the entire amount
under the impugned award is deposited with this court with together
with accrued interest.
9. In view of the above, the stay granted earlier is made
absolute. The application stands allowed.
C.A. NO.10958 OF 2026 (for withdrawal of amount):-
10. This application is filed by the legal representatives of
original sole claimant – Prabhu Nana Ingle for withdrawal of the
amount deposited by the acquiring body in this court.
4 34-CA.4919
11. It is not in dispute that the sole source of livelihood of the
applicants has been acquired by the acquiring body under
compulsory acquisition. After assessing the evidence, the reference
court has determined the amount of compensation. Although there
is challenge to the findings rendered by the reference court, the
applicants are certainly entitled for some portion of the award
amount deposited by the acquiring body in this court.
12. Hence, the application is partly allowed. The applicants
are permitted to withdraw 50% of the deposited amount, on
furnishing an undertaking to the satisfaction of learned Registrar
(Judicial) of this Court. The applicants are also permitted to withdraw
further 25% of the amount deposited by the acquring body on
furnishing solvent security to the satisfaction of learned Registrar
(Judicial). Balance amount be kept in fixed deposit in nationalised
bank.
C.A. No.11206 of 2026 (for bringing L.Rs.) :-
13. This application is filed for amendment in the title clause
of the First Appeal by incorporating the names of the applicant nos.
1-A and 1-B as legal representatives of sole respondent in the First
Appeal.
5 34-CA.4919
14. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is
allowed. Delay stands condoned. Abatement, if any, stands set
aside. The applicant/appellant to amend the title clause of the First
Appeal and the applications therein within two weeks from today
online. Suffice it to note, the names of the legal representatives in
have been furnished in hard copies in the court itself. The same is
taken on record.
[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
………..
KBP
Checking your session…