Bombay High Court
GANESH CHANGANRAO SOLANKAR DIED THROUGH LRSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THORUGH SLAO SPECIAL UNIT AURANAGABAD
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The court ordered the respondent to deposit the deficit amount together with a 12% interest component within 60 days.
Summary
The original claimants filed two civil applications seeking a court order directing the respondent to deposit a deficit amount arising from a miscalculation of days in a prior award, together with 12% interest. The court found that the discrepancy in calculation was undisputed and that the award had been corrected after the appeals. Consequently, the court allowed both applications and ordered the respondent to deposit the shortfall plus interest in the court’s office within 60 days. The judgment emphasizes the court’s power to enforce compliance with its awards and to correct monetary deficiencies. No other substantive legal issues were raised.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondent should be directed to deposit the deficit amount arising from the corrected award, along with interest, in the court’s office
Subjects
- civil application
- deficit amount
- interest
- court award
- miscalculation
- direction to deposit
- court enforcement
Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
935 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2794 OF 2023
EKNATH PUNJAJI NAWALE DIED THR LRS BHIMABAI EKNATH
NAWALE AND ORS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPE. UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3034 OF 2023
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
VERSUS
BABASAHEB KADUBA NAWALE AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 141 OF 2024
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
VERSUS
GAJANAN CHAGANRAO SOLANKER AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2441 OF 2023
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
VERSUS
EKNATH PUNJAJI NAWALE DIED THROUGH LRS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2787 OF 2023
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
VERSUS
GANESH CHANGANRAO SOLANKAR DIED THROUGH LRS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2176 OF 2024
GAJANAN CHAGANRAO SOLANKAR
VERSUS
khs/Jan.2026/2794
-2-
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2177 OF 2024
SANTOSH EKNATH ZHALKE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPE. UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 140 OF 2024
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
VERSUS
SANTOSH EKNATH ZHALKE AND OTHERS
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2929 OF 2025
GANESH CHAGANRAO SOLANKER DEAD THROUGH LRS SUNITA
GANESH SOLANKAR AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH S.L.A.O. SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2793 OF 2023
RAMNATH BARKU TAMBE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2796 OF 2023
BABASAHEB KADUBA NAVALE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SLAO SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 497 OF 2023
khs/Jan.2026/2794
-3-
CIDCO AURANGABAD CHIEF OFFICER CIDCO
VERSUS
RAMNATH BARKU TAMBE AND OTHERS
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15939 OF 2022
IN FA/497/2023
CIDCO AURANGABAD CHIEF OFFICER CIDCO
VERSUS
RAMNATH BARKU TAMBE AND OTHERS
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11413 OF 2024
IN FA/140/2024
SANTOSH EKNATH ZHALKE DEAD AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD AND ANOTHER
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12730 OF 2025
IN FA/2441/2023
EKNATH PUNJAJI NAWALE DEAD THROUGH LRS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13336 OF 2025
IN FA/2787/2023
GANESH CHANGANRAO SOLANKAR DIED THROUGH LRS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SLAO SPECIAL UNIT
AURANGABAD
Mr.A.B.Kale, Advocate for the appellant/applicants.
Mr.B.V.Virdhe, AGP for the respondent/State.
Mr.S.V.Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.2.
khs/Jan.2026/2794
-4-
( CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, JJ. )
DATE : 8 JANUARY, 2026
PER COURT :
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12730 OF 2025
IN FA/2441/2023
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13336 OF 2025
IN FA/2787/2023
1. These are the applications filed by the original claimants
seeking directions to respondent No.2 to deposit the amount in the
office of this Court. The difference is because of the wrong calculation
in the number of days, as the Court passing the award has corrected the
dates subsequent to filing of the appeals. This position is not in
dispute.
2. In view of the above, both these applications are allowed
and Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the deficit amount
alongwith 12 percent component, in the office of this Court, within a
period of 60 days from today.
khs/Jan.2026/2794
-5-
3. Civil applications are allowed in the above terms.
( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J.)
khs/Jan.2026/2794
Checking your session…