FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.870 OF 2010 ________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ________________________________________________________ Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2 It is not in dispute that the acquisition proceedings were commenced and have been taken to its logical end by passing of award and taking of possession of the disputed property. If the petitioners had any grievance about non payment of compensation for 300 plum trees, ought to have raised that issue in the said proceedings and in any case, if they were not satisfied with the said award, pursued the matter further by way of reference, if they were so advised. That statutory remedy has not been adopted by the petitioners. Obviously, the petitioners have been advised to resort to remedy of writ petition having realized that the statutory remedy has become barred by limitation since the award was passed on 28th April, 1991. The question of entertaining the relief now claimed in this petition by directing the respondent No.3 to pay compensation for 300 plum trees along with interest u/s 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and all other statutory benefits there for cannot be countenanced. 3 The learned Counsel for the petitioners was called upon to show us one precedent where such reliefs can be entertained by the Writ Court in the fact situation of the present case. He is not in a position to do so. 4 In our opinion, this petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. (S.S. SHINDE, J) (A.M. KHANWILKAR,J) 10.02.2010. PLK/* ...