Bombay High Court

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SINA KOLEGAON MEDIUM PROJECTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The warrant issued against the judgment debtor was unlawful and the order of the executing court was set aside.

Summary

The Executive Engineer filed a writ petition challenging a 06‑10‑2023 order of the CJSD, Paranda that issued a warrant against the judgment debtor. The petitioner had deposited the entire award amount except for interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the interest component was the subject of pending first appeals. Respondent No. 3, the original claimant, invoked Order XXI Rule 54 of the CPC to obtain execution, leading to the warrant. The High Court noted that an interim stay had been granted on the award and that only the interest portion was under appeal, making the execution unlawful. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the executing court’s order.

Issues considered

Whether execution can be lawfully effected on the interest portion of a decree when an interim stay has been granted on the principal award.
Whether the issuance of a warrant under Order XXI Rule 54 of the CPC violates the provisions of Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 during pendency of an appeal.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure — s. Order XXI Rule 54
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 28

Subjects

Writ petition
Execution
Stay order
Interest
Land Acquisition Act
CPC Order XXI Rule 54
Warrant
Appellate stay

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:1344
                                                                    948-WP-12634-2023.odt


                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         948 WRIT PETITION NO. 12634 OF 2023

                   The Executive Engineer Sina Kolegaon Medium Project
                                         VERSUS
               The State Of Maharashtra Through The Collector And Others
                                            …..
          Mr. Tambe Rahul A, Advocate for the Petitioner
          Mrs. D. S. Jape, AGP for the Respondents - State
          Mr. A. S. More, Advocate for Respondent No.3
                                            …..
                                       CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                       DATE       : 13.01.2026
          PER COURT :

          1.    Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.


          2.    By way of present petition, the Petitioner assails the order dated
          06.10.2023 passed below Exhibit 10 by the CJSD, Paranda, in Special
          Darkhast No. 13 of 2019, whereby, warrant was issued against the
          Judgment debtor.


          3.    Learned Counsel for the Petitioner Mr. Tambe, submits that
          against the order passed in LAR No. 519 of 2012 and other connected
          matters, the First Appeals have been filed and the same are pending
          before the appellate Courts. Pursuant to the order passed in Reference,
          the petitioner has deposited the entire amount except the interest
          under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the
          Act”). Subsequently an application under Order XXI Rule 54 of the CPC
          was filed by Respondent No. 3/Original Claimant in RD No. 13 of 2019
          and the executing Court issued the warrant against the judgment
          debtor.

                                              1
                                                            948-WP-12634-2023.odt


4.      I have gone through the order passed by the learned executing
Court and I have perused the record placed before me, it reveals that
entire amount has been deposited except the interest under Section 28
of the Act and only the interest part is assailed in the First Appeal.


5.      Considering the fact that this this Court vide its order dated
10.10.2023 granted ad-interim stay to the award passed by the
Reference Court and considering that only the interest part is assailed,
I am inclined to allow the Writ Petition by the setting aside the order
passed by the executing Court.


6.      In view thereof the Writ Petition is allowed. The order dated
06.10.2023 passed below Exhibit 10 by the CJSD, Paranda, in Special
Darkhast No. 13 of 2019 is quashed and set aside.



                                         [SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.]



Sameer/January-2026




                                     2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…