1 CA No.10669 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Civil Application No.10669 of 2011 In Civil Application No.7893 of 2011 In First Appeal No.665 of 2009 And Civil Application No.10670/2011 In First Appeal No.665 of 2009 Pushpabai w/o Bhausaheb Gule And Others. .. Applicants. Versus Raosaheb s/o Bala Gule And Others. .. Respondents. -------- Shri. U.L. Momale, Advocate for applicants. Shri. A.S. Bajaj, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Shri. S.K. Kadam, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent No.3. -------- With Civil Application No.10671 of 2011 And Civil Application No.10672 of 2011 In First Appeal No.665 of 2009 --------- 2 CA No.10669 of 2011 Shri. Sunil M. Vibhute, Advocate for applicants. Shri. A.S. Bajaj, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Shri. S.K. Kadam, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent No.2. Shri. D.R. Jayabhar, Advocate, for respondent No.4. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & T.V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATE 16 SEPTEMBER 2011 PER COURT : 1) Heard. 2) After perusal of the contentions raised and considering the submissions advanced, we are inclined to allow the applications for intervention in the first appeal. 3) Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submit that they are related to respondent No.1 Raosaheb Balaji Gule in First Appeal No.665 of 2009. Applicants – Pushpabai, Parmeshwar and Baby @ Mangalbai have filed Special Civil Suit No.156 of 2008 while applicant Shantabai filed Special Civil Suit No.480 of 2009 for partition and separate possession against Raosaheb 3 CA No.10669 of 2011 (respondent No.1 in the first appeal) and others. The counsel submits that the trial Court had passed interim orders in Special Civil Suit No.156 of 2008 (Smt. Pushpabai wd/o Bhausaheb Gule and others v. Raosaheb so Bala Gule and others). By an order dated 7-4-2008 the trial Court had temporarily restrained the Collector from disbursing amount of compensation till further orders of the Court. This fact was not disclosed by respondent No.1 in First Appeal namely Raosaheb Bala Gule. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Raosaheb Gule does not dispute the factual position that such suits were filed and are pending. The counsel further submits that consequent to the order passed by this Court dated 26th August 2011 the amount has not be withdrawn by the applicants in Civil Application No.7893 of 2011 i.e. Raosaheb and others. 4) In the light of the fact that the parties are litigating in Civil Suits in respect of their respective shares in respect of the amount of compensation awarded by the Reference Court we pass following order. 5) The order passed by this Court on 26th August 2011 in Civil Application No.7863 of 2011 in First Appeal 4 CA No.10669 of 2011 No.665 of 2009 is recalled. The registry of this Court shall not permit withdrawal of the amount of compensation to any of the parties without specific directions issued by this Court. The said amount be invested in a fixed deposit scheme of a Nationalised Bank. 6) The civil applications stand disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (T.V. NALAWADE, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.) rsl