50 FA-205-2021

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CIVIL APPLICATION (O) NO.399 OF 2020

[Union of India and Anr. ..Vrs.. Champat Sadashiv Fating (Dead)

through his LRs and Anr.]

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

appearanfices, Court's orders of direfictions Court's or Judge's

order and Registrar's orders.

Shri. V. M. Gadkari, Advoficate for the Applificants/Appellants

Mrs. S. S. Wandile, Advoficate for the Respondent No.1

Ms. M. Deshmukh, AGP for the Respondent No.2.

CORAM :

NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE :

8 ^th SEPTEMBER, 2021.

1.

Sinfice the entire deficretal amount is deposited,

the extension as prayed for, is allowed. The

applification is disposed of.

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1143 OF 2021.

2.

For the reasons disficlosed in the applification, the

applification is allowed and disposed of.

3.

An appropriate amendment be ficarried out within

a period of one week from today.

FIRST APPEAL NO.205 OF 2021.

4.

Having heard respefictive Counsel for the parties

for sometime.

5.

What is notificed is, the enhanficement granted

under Sefiction 18 of the Land Aficquisition Afict in

relation to the land situated at Mouza Salod (Hirapur),

Taluka and Distrifict Wardha bearing Survey No.627/1

out of 2.42 HR land, 0.26 HR land, whifich was

aficquired for publific purpose.

50 FA-205-2021

2

6.

My attention is invited to the judgments of this

Court in First Appeal No.192 of 2017 with other

ficonneficted appeals deficided on 08.08.2019 and First

Appeal No.322 of 2017 with other ficonneficted appeals

deficided on 04.04.2017, so as to ficlaim that the issues

raised in that present appeals are squarely ficovered by

the said judgments, whifich were preferred by the land

owners seeking enhanficement.

7.

Though Shri. V. M. Gadkari, learned Counsel for

the Appellants has tried to diferentiate the same on

the issue of lofication, however, it fican be seen that the

issue in this Appeal is squarely ficovered by the

aforesaid two judgments of this Court.

8.

That being so, I hardly see any reason whifich

warrants interferenfice in the appellate jurisdifiction. As

sufich, this appeal fails and same stands dismissed.

9.

As a ficonsequenfice of dismissal of appeal, the

ficlaimants are entitled to withdraw the entire amount

of ficompensation with aficficrued interest thereon.

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

TAMBE