1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6632 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2989 OF 2009 Kamalabai Sahebrao Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6629 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2985 OF 2009 Lilabai Bhika Mali .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6631 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2983 OF 2009 Hanumantrao Ramdas Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents 2 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6630 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2991 OF 2009 Tamizbai Rustum Patel .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6633 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2990 OF 2009 Rahematbai Isa Patel .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6741 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2987 OF 2009 Babu Vazir Patel .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11025 OF 2010 3 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2914 OF 2009 Kadar Hameed Patel .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11027 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2915 OF 2009 Kisan Ramchandra Mali .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11026 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2916 OF 2009 Jagdish Namdeo Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6737 OF 2010 IN 4 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2986 OF 2009 Anusayabai Vithal Mali .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6920 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2993 OF 2009 Bhaidas Hiralal Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11021 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 3235 OF 2009 Bandu Rupla Wagh (Died) LRS Waman Bandu Wagh and others .. Applicants Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12166 OF 2010 IN 5 FIRST APPEAL NO. 966 OF 2010 Indubai Chhabilal Mali and others .. Applicants Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11023 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 977 OF 2010 Santosh Hiraman Patil (Died) LRs Gangaram Santosh Patil and others .. Applicants Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11028 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 979 OF 2010 Dhanraj Namdeo Mali .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11461 OF 2010 IN 6 FIRST APPEAL NO. 968 OF 2010 Laxman Ramdas Mali and others .. Applicants Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11460 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 963 OF 2010 Rukhmabai Fakira Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11020 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 969 OF 2010 Bhata Shamrao Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11022 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 976 OF 2010 7 Fakira Hussain Patel (Died) Jaittunbi Fakira Patel .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11024 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 962 OF 2010 Baliram Manga Chaudhari .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11033 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 975 OF 2010 Bhaskar Damu Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11032 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 980 OF 2010 8 Dhanubai Trambak Sonawane .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11031 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 961 OF 2010 Devidas Suklal Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11030 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 967 OF 2010 Parvatabai Manga Chambhar (Died) Devidas Sukhlal Shewale (Chambhar) and others .. Applicants Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11029 OF 2010 IN 9 FIRST APPEAL NO. 970 OF 2010 Adhar Chindha Patil .. Applicant Versus The Divisional Officer The MIDC Nashik and others .. Respondents Shri A. B. Kale, Advocate for the Applicant in all matters Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 in all matters. Smt. R. K. Ladda, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State in all matters CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 03RD SEPTEMBER, 2010. PER COURT : . These are the applications filed for withdrawal of the amount deposited by the non applicant No. 1 pursuant to the order passed by this Court. 2. The Land Acquisition Reference filed by the present applicants came to be allowed and the compensation came to be enhanced. 3. The present non applicant No. 1 is challenging the said 10 award. The said appeals challenging the award have been admitted by this Court and the amount has been deposited as per the orders passed by this Court. 4. Shri Kale, learned counsel for applicants submits that the Reference Court has considered almost 35 sale deeds while comparing market value. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation in the range of Rs. 40,000/- to Rs. 50,000/- per hector and the Reference Court has enhanced compensation in the range of Rs. 1,05,000/- to Rs. 1,20,000/- per hector, considering numerous sale instances produced before the Reference Court. 5. The lands of the applicants who are agriculturists have been acquired. Their source of livelihood itself is lost. 6. The amount lying in the Court will not survive any purpose. In the light of the same, the applicants can be allowed to withdraw the amount with condition to furnish security. In the result I pass the following order : I. The applicants are entitled to withdraw the 11 50% amount deposited on furnishing an undertaking on affidavit stating that in the event the appeals are allowed, then they would deposit the amount in the Court within a period of eight weeks from the date of the judgment of this Court. II. Remaining 50% of the amount is allowed to be withdrawn on furnishing a bank guarantee of any Scheduled Bank. II. The civil applications are accordingly disposed of. [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/Sept.10