Bombay High Court
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CIVIL CONSTRCUTION DIVISION MSPGCL THERMAL POWER STATIONversusDAGADUBA JIJARAM NIRMALE AND ORS
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Holding
The Court held that the delay is condoned, the petitioners may withdraw 50% of the deposited compensation upon undertaking and an additional 25% upon furnishing a surety, and the stay applications are allowed.
Summary
The petitioners, Mahaling Dharmaraj Rajmane and co‑applicants, sought condonation of delay in filing several civil applications relating to land acquired in 2008 and the subsequent award of enhanced compensation by a Reference Court. They also applied to withdraw a portion of the compensation amount that had been deposited by the acquiring body, MSPGCL, arguing that they had not received the enhanced sum. The acquiring body opposed, contending that interest should accrue only from possession and that the compensation assessment based on sale deeds was excessive. The Court examined the Reference Court's methodology, which relied on comparable sales from the same village, and found it satisfactory, thereby permitting partial withdrawal of the deposited amount subject to undertakings and surety. It also condoned the delay in the applications and allowed the stay applications, disposing of the civil applications.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the civil applications can be condoned.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to withdraw part of the compensation amount deposited by the acquiring body.
- Whether a stay of the deposited amount is appropriate pending further remedy.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- delay condonation
- withdrawal of deposited amount
- stay order
- Reference Court
- comparative sale
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:25861
981 CA 2181 26+.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
981 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2181 OF 2026
IN FAST/24636/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2185 OF 2026
IN FAST/24639/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2186 OF 2026
IN FAST/24633/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8769 OF 2025
IN FAST/24636/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8770 OF 2025
IN FAST/24639/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8768 OF 2025
IN FAST/24636/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8790 OF 2025
IN FAST/24627/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2184 OF 2026
IN FAST/24605/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2187 OF 2026
IN FAST/24617/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8778 OF 2025
IN FAST/24605/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8783 OF 2025
IN FAST/24614/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8784 OF 2025
IN FAST/24614/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8813 OF 2025
IN FAST/24633/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2182 OF 2026
IN FAST/24614/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2183 OF 2026
1/4
981 CA 2181 26+.odt
IN FAST/24627/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8771 OF 2025
IN FAST/24639/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8777 OF 2025
IN FAST/24605/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8786 OF 2025
IN FAST/24617/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8785 OF 2025
IN FAST/24617/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8789 OF 2025
IN FAST/24627/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8812 OF 2025
IN FAST/24633/2025
MAHALING DHARMARAJ RAJMANE
VERSUS
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL), CIVIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT,
MSPGCL
...
Advocate for Applicant/Claimant : Mr. T G Gaikwad
Advocate for Applicants/Claimants in CA 2182/2026 and 2184/2026 with
connected matters : Mr. Parikshit S. Mantri h/f Mr. Parag V. Barde
Advocate for Respondent No. 1/Applicant : Mr. Akash D. Gade
A.G.P. for Respondent no. 2 : Mr. S. P. Joshi
...
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 02.07.2026
PER COURT :
APPLICATIONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY :
1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Gade for the applicant.
2. Perused the application and reasons stated therein. Apparently, the
delay is occasioned on account of administrative reasons, which are duly
explained in the application. In the result, case is made out to condone the
delay.
2/4
981 CA 2181 26+.odt
3. The Civil Applications are allowed. Delay is condoned.
4. Appeals be registered subject to removal of the office objections.
CIVIL APPLICATIONS FOR WITHDRAWAL OF AMOUNT
5. The applicants seek permission to withdraw the amount deposited by
the respondent-Acquiring Body in pursuance of the Award passed by the
Reference Court.
6. Learned counsel Mr. Gaikwad appearing for the applicant submits that
the applicants have lost their lands in the year 2008 due to compulsory
acquisition and till date they have not received the enhanced compensation,
as determined by the Reference Court.
7. Learned counsel Mr. Gade, appearing for the Acquiring Body
vehemently opposes the applications contending that the interest on
compensation amount is granted from the date of possession and not from
the date of Award. Further, he submits that the assessment of compensation
on the basis of the sale-deeds, which cannot be termed as comparative sale
instances, is excessive and exorbitant.
8. Having considered the reasons adopted by the Reference Court, this
Court find that the Reference Court, relying upon sale instances from same
village made the assessment of compensation. In that view of the matter,
the applicants are entitled to withdraw the compensation amount. Hence,
following order is passed :
ORDER
(I) The applications are partly allowed. The
applicants are permitted to withdraw 50% of compensation
amount as deposited by the Acquiring Body subject to
furnishing of usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the
3/4
981 CA 2181 26+.odt
Registrar (Judicial) of this Court that they shall redeposit
the amount in case this Court directs them to do so.
(ii) The applicants are further permitted to withdraw
25% of the amount of compensation deposited, on
furnishing solvent surety/security to the satisfaction of the
Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
(iii) The Civil Applications are disposed of.
CIVIL APPLICATIONS FOR STAY :
9. Learned counsel Mr. Gade for the Appellant informed that entire
amount as per award passed by the Reference Court is deposited with the
Registry.
10. The aforesaid statement is disputed by the learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the respondents, contending that the amount deposited would
not constitute entire amount of compensation. However, there is no
impediment in considering the present applications. In the result, the
applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ with liberty in favour
of the claimants to pursue their remedy for deposit of the amount, if any
due as per the Award.
11. The Civil Applications are disposed of.
FIRST APPEALS :
12. Admit.
13. Print and paper book is dispensed with.
( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)
mkd/-
4/4
Checking your session…