1 WP 7561.2011 - [ J ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7561 OF 2011 1. Tarachand Sagarmal Agrawal Age : 66 Yrs., Occ. Business, R/o : Sagar Building, Agrawal Nagar, Malegaon Road, Dhule. 2. Rama Vinod Agrawal Age : 49 Yrs., Occ. Household, R/o : Sagar Building, Agrawal Nagar, Malegaon Road, Dhule. 3. Urmila Girish Agrawal Age : 45 Yrs., Occ. Household, R/o : Sagar Building, Agrawal Nagar, Malegaon Road, Dhule. 4. Naresh Puranmal Agrawal Age : 50 Yrs., Occ. Business, R/o : Agra Road, Dhule, Tq. & Dist. : Dhule. 5. Ravindra Puranmal Agrawal Age : 48 Yrs., Occ. Business, R/o : Agra Road, Dhule, Tq. & Dist. : Dhule. ........... PETITIONERS V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Collector, Dhule. 2 WP 7561.2011 - [ J ] 2. Competent Authority for National High Way No. 3 & Special Land Acquisition Officer No. 2, Dhule Collector Office, Dhule. 3. Bhupendrasing Sadhusing Parmar Age : 59 Yrs., Occ. Trader, R/o : Parmer Petrol Pump, Gut No. 179/1, Mohadi Pdra, Dhule. ..... RESPONDENTS Mr. P.M.Shah, Sr. Counsel instructed by Mr. S.P.Shah, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.P. More, Asstt..Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. P.V. Mandlik, Sr. Counsel instructed by Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for Resp. No. 3. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 11/10/2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. Heard Mr. P.M.Shah, Sr. Counsel instructed by Mr. S.P.Shah, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. P.P. More, Asstt..Govt. Pleader for State and Mr. P.V. Mandlik, Sr. Counsel instructed by Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for Resp. No. 3. 3 WP 7561.2011 - [ J ] 3. The Order impugned is passed by the District Court directing the petitioners to deposit the amount received by them from defendant nos. 6 and 7 in the Court within one month, failing which shall carry interest @ 12 % per annum. 4. The learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner and for respondent no. 3 have made various submissions regarding the merits of the matter and about the entitlement of the petitioner and/or respondent no. 3. 5. From the record, it is manifest that the petitioners have withdrawn the amount. Mr. P.M.Shah, the learned Sr. Counsel submits that the petitioners have received Rs. 48,00,000/- after deducting Rs. 12,00,000/- as TDS. 6. Without examining the merits of the matter, interest of justice would be sub-served if the petitioners are directed to furnish the solvent security to the extent of Rs. 40,00,000/- and the trial Court is directed to dispose of the Suit expeditiously. 7. In the result, I pass the following order. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The petitioners shall submit solvent security to the extent of the amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- within the period of four ( 4 ) weeks from today i.e. 4 WP 7561.2011 - [ J ] 08/11/2011 to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The trial Court shall decide the Suit as expeditiously as possible and preferably within the period of nine ( 9 ) months from today. 8. It is made clear that I have not dealt with the merits of the matter and has passed the order with the consent of the learned Sr. Counsel for the respective parties. All points are kept open. 9. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] KNP/WP 7561.2011 - [ J ]