Bombay High Court

NANDABAI SHATRUGHN BHISAD AND ANRversusMaharashtra State Road Transport Corporation

Disposal: Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Bench: SANJAY A DESHMUKH

Holding

The court stayed the execution, allowed partial withdrawal of the deposited amount, and condoned the delay in filing the appeal.

Summary

The Maharashtra State Road Transportation Corporation (MSRTC) filed several applications before the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court seeking relief in a civil dispute with Nandabai Shatrughn Bhisad and another. The first application requested a stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award, which the court granted after noting that the full amount was already deposited in the court. A subsequent application sought permission to withdraw the deposited amount; the court partially allowed it, permitting withdrawal of 75% of the sum with interest upon furnishing a standard undertaking. The third application pleaded for condonation of a 252‑day delay in filing the first appeal; the court, finding the delay neither deliberate nor intentional, condoned it in the interest of justice. Finally, the court issued notice of the first appeal, with service of notice waived by the respondents' counsel. The orders collectively disposed of the applications and set the procedural course for the appeal.

Issues considered

Whether a stay of execution of the judgment and award should be granted.
Whether the applicant may withdraw the amount deposited in the court and to what extent.
Whether the 252‑day delay in filing the first appeal can be condoned.

Subjects

stay of execution
withdrawal of court‑deposited amount
condonation of delay
civil procedure
appeal
interest
undertaking

Judgment

                                              982 CA NO. 1818 OF 2024.odt


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD
           982 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1818 OF 2024
                      IN FAST/3868/2024

 Maharashtra State Roadt Ransportation Corporation Through Its
                   Divsional Controller Parbhani
                             VERSUS
               Nandabai Shatrughn Bhisad And Anr
                                ...
Mr. D. S. Bagul, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. P. C. Mayure, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
                               WITH
              CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1819 OF 2024
                    IN FAST/3868/2024 WITH
             CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12207 OF 2025
                        IN FAST/3868/2024
                                ….

                    CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
                      DATE : 25.06.2026
PER COURT :-

APPLICATION FOR STAY

1.          This is an application seeking stay to the execution of

the impugned judgment and award.


2.          The learned advocate for the applicant / appellant

submits that the entire amount as per the impugned judgment and

award is deposited in this Court.


3.        In view of the above, the application is allowed in terms

of prayer clause ‘B’ and disposed of.


                                                                 1 of 3
                                     (( 2 ))      982 CA NO. 1818 OF 2024


APPLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF AMOUNT

1.             This is an application seeking permission to withdraw the

amount deposited in this Court pursuant to the award.


2.             Heard the learned advocates for both sides.


3.             Learned advocate for respondent 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/s is/are permitted to withdraw 75% 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.

APPLICATION FOR DELAY

1.             Heard the learned Advocates for the parties.


2.             This is an application for condonation of delay of 252

days caused in filing the first appeal.


                                                                   2 of 3
                                    (( 3 ))      982 CA NO. 1818 OF 2024


3.          The learned Advocate for respondent 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 252 days caused in filing the first appeal is
           condoned.


FIRST APPEAL

1.          Issue    notice   to   the   respondents,      returnable      on

06.08.2026.


2.          Mr. P. C. Mayure, learned Advocate waives service of

notice for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.




                                   [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ]
HRJadhav




                                                                  3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…