M.S. Sonak, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the parties agree that all these petitions can be disposed of with common judgment and order, since the issues involved therein are common.

3. In Writ Petition No. 3821 of 2006 and Writ Petition No.5270 of 2006, the challenge is to the judgment and order dated 4th January 2006 made by the Judge, Small Causes Court, Pune (Appeal Court). The operative portion of which reads as follows:

"(1) The Appeal is partly allowed with proportionate costs.

(2) The Respondents do pay balance compensation of Rs.1,17,07,094/- (Rupees One Crore Seventeen Lac Seven Thousand Ninety four only) towards the compensation of land admeasuring 1854 sq.,mtrs. i.e. 19,950 sq.ft as detailed described in para 1B of the Plaint to the Appellants along with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of possession i.e. 12.8.2002 till realization of decretal amount.

(3) The Claim of compensation as regards to land admeasuring 646 sq. mtrs. As described in plaint para 1C is rejected.

(4) Decree be drawn up accordingly."

4. Writ Petition No.3821 of 2006 has been instituted by the Municipal Corporation of City of Pune (PMC) ch