Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.L. DATTU AND SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.
WAJIDMIYA ABDUL RAHEMAN SHAIKH & ORS. – Appellants
VERSUS
MAHARASHTRA IND. DEV. COR. & ORS. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 8056-8070 of 2013
Decided on : 10-9-2013.
Delay - Special Leave Petitions - Condoning delay in filing - Interim order - Enhanced compensation - Release of compensation without security
Fact of the Case:
The appeals were directed against the interim order passed by the High Court, rejecting the reasonable prayer made by the appellants for release of enhanced compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prayer made by the appellants required to be accepted and granted, directing that 50% of the enhanced compensation shall be released without security and the balance upon furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Collector.
Issues: Delay in filing Special Leave Petitions, rejection of reasonable prayer by the High Court, release of enhanced compensation
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to condone the delay in filing the Special Leave Petitions and granted the prayer made by the appellants for release of enhanced compensation, with 50% to be released without security and the balance upon furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Collector.
Final Decision: The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with the court directing the release of 50% of the enhanced compensation without security and the balance upon furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Collector.
ORDER
1. Delay in filing the Special Leave Petitions is condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. These appeals are directed against the interim order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Civil Application No. 6497 of 2009 in First Appeal Stamp No. 12025 of 2009, dated 17.08.2009, in Civil Application No. 279 of 2011 in First Appeal No. 29 of 2011, dated 01.02.2011, Civil Application No. 9096 of 2011 in First Appeal No. 2308 of 2010, dated 02.09.2011, Civil Application No. 280 of 2011 in First Appeal No. 28 of 2011, dated 1.02.2011, Civil Application No. 5719 of 2011 in First Appeal No. 2314 of 2010, dated 09.09.2011, Civil Application No. 6913 of 2012 in First Appeal No. 3563 of 2011 and Civil Application No. 7774 of 2012 in F.A.No.3562 of 2011, dated 28.09.2012, Civil Application Nos. 14973 of 2011 in First Appeal No. 2679 of 2011 and F.A.No.14974 of 2011 in F.A.No.2675 of 2011, C.A.No.14975 of 2011 in F.A.NO.2676 of 2011, C.A.No.14976 of 2011 in F.A.No.2677 of 2011, C.A.No.14977 of 2011 in F.A.No.2678 of 2011, C.A.No.14978 of 2011 in F.A.No.2680 of 2011, C.A.No.14979 of 2011 in F.A.No.2681 of 2011, dated 20.06.2012. By the impugned orders, the High Court has rejected the reasonable prayer made by the appellants herein.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis, we are of the opinion that the prayer made by the appellants requires to be accepted and granted. Accordingly, we pass the following order-“We direct that the 50% of the enhanced compensation granted to the appellants shall be released without security whereas balance of 50% shall be released to them on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Collector”.
5. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
