1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7254 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.12368 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Mahesh Harishchandra Somani and others .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7256 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12306 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Vasant Solapure @ Vithalrao Dhotre and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. 2 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7258 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12361 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Babu Chandsaheb Bagwan and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7260 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12376 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Maheboob Chandsaheb Bagwan and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. 3 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7262 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12367 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Ashoksing S/o Babusing Pawar and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7264 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12382 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Sow Rohini W/o Ashoksing Pawar and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. 4 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7268 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12385 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Sk. Mohammad S/o Chandsaheb Bagwan and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7270 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO. 12373 OF 2009 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Latur. .. Applicant Versus Harishchandra Gulab Somani and another .. Respondents Shri G. S. Khaire, Advocate h/f Shri S. S. Dande, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M. S. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. Shri K. G. Patil, A. G. P. for the Respondent No. 1. 5 CORAM : B. R. GAVAI, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 21ST AUGUST, 2009. ORAL ORDER [ Per B. R. Gavai, J. ] : 1. These applications are for stay to the effect and operation of the award passed by learned Reference Court dated 25.11.2008. We have perused the judgment passed by the learned Reference Court. Initially, the Land Acquisition Officer had awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 400/- per Are, which has been increased to Rs. 7,000/- per Are. From the perusal of the judgment, we find that the appellant has a good case on merits. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow the applications on the condition that, the appellant shall deposit 50% of the amount awarded, in this Court within a period of four weeks from today. It is further made clear that on the aforesaid amount being deposited in this Court, respondents/claimants shall be entitled to withdraw 50% of the amount deposited, without furnishing any surety and the remaining 50% amount shall be permitted to be withdrawn on respondent- claimants furnishing nationalized/scheduled bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court and by giving an undertaking that, if in the final judgment/order, it is found that the amount withdrawn by the respondents/claimants is in excess than the amount to which they are entitled, they would refund the said amount. 6 2. Authenticated copy be provided to the learned counsel for parties. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ B. R. GAVAI, J.] bsb/August 09