WITH CA/7679/2023 IN FAST/4878/2021 BHALCHANDRA VASUDEO PARALKAR DIED THR LRS MANGALABAI PARALKAR & Ors. v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE COLLECTOR OSMANABAD & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
considering the right to defend, the application stands allowed
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. There is no strong objection from other side and considering the right to defend, the application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and ‘C’.
- Para 55. The application is accordingly disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7676 OF 2023 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7680 OF 2023 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7678 OF 2023 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7679 OF 2023
- Para 1010. The civil applications are accordingly disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7584 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7591 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7586 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7588 OF 2021
Judgment
Mr. L.C. Patil – Advocate for Applicants Mr. S.N. Kendre – AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, State Ms. S.D. Shelke – Advocate for Respondent No.3 …. CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. DATE : 6th July, 2023 PER COURT : CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7677 OF 2023
Heard rival submissions. Pooja K. 916-CA-7676-2023
The applicants are seeking permission to bring themselves on record in the appeal being the legal representatives of sole claimant – respondent No.1 – Bhalchandra Vasudeo Paralkar, who admittedly died on 6th December, 2020, by condoning the delay of 339 days.
Operative part
There is no strong objection from other side and considering the right to defend, the application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and ‘C’.
The appellant – acquiring body is directed to carry out the amendment forthwith.
The application is accordingly disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7676 OF 2023 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7680 OF 2023 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7678 OF 2023 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7679 OF 2023
Heard rival submissions.
The respective applicants in all these applications are seeking withdrawal of their amounts of compensation, which have been deposited by the acquiring body alongwith the Pooja K. interest accrued thereon. It appears that the acquiring body in all these matters has deposited only 50% of the compensation 916-CA-7676-2023 amounts.
This Court vide order dated 30th June, 2023 in other connected matters has already permitted the applicants therein to withdraw 50% of the total compensation amounts.
In view of the same, present applicants are permitted to withdraw the entire deposited compensation amounts that means 50% of the total compensation amounts alongwith the interest accrued thereon till date on furnishing usual undertaking to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
The civil applications are accordingly disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7584 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7591 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7586 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7588 OF 2021
Since the appellant – acquiring body in all these matters, has deposited the amount of compensation as directed by this Pooja K. Court, the applications are made absolute in terms of prayer 916-CA-7676-2023 clause – B and disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7583 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7589 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7585 OF 2021 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7587 OF 2021
The appellant – acquiring body in all these applications is seeking condonation of delay of 2194 days, which appears to be cause due to obtaining sanctions at various stages. There is no strong objection from other side and therefore the delay of 2194 days stands condoned.
The appeals be placed for admission after removal of office objections, if any.
The applications are accordingly disposed of. [ SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE ] JUDGE Pooja K.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: considering the right to defend, the application stands allowed
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 06 Jul 2023. The bench was SANDIPKUMAR C MORE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.