Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

1949 DAILYLAW 89 (BOM)

THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT v. ANNARAO DIGAMBER PATIL AND ANR

CA/6122/2009 · 2026-07-02

Shri Siddheshwar Sundarrao Thombre

body1949

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 of 4 15-FA.1949.2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 15 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1949 OF 2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS KASHIBAI SOPANRAO WAGHULE (DIED) THROUGH LRS AND ORS ... Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. ... AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6124 OF 2009 IN FA/1950/2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS VENKAT BHIMRAO RUEKAR AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6129 OF 2009 IN FA/1949/2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS KASHIBAI SOPANRAO WAGHULE (DIED) THROUGH LRS AND ORS … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6131 OF 2009 IN FA/1951/2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS BABU BHAURAO JADHAV (DIED) THROUGH LRS AND ORS … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Applicant. Tauseef 2026:BHC-AUG:26434 2 of 4 15-FA.1949.2013 Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. Mr. Gajanan K. Sontakke, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 7. AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6122 OF 2009 IN FA/1954/2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT VERSUS ANNARAO DIGAMBER PATIL AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1952 OF 2013 THE EX ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS OMPRAKASH SHANKARRAO PIND AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1953 OF 2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS ISMAIL MEHEBOOB SAHEB SHAIKH AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1951 OF 2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS BABU BHAURAO JADHAV (DIED) THROUGH LRS AND ORS … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. Tauseef 3 of 4 15-FA.1949.2013 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6133 OF 2009 IN FA/1952/2013 THE EX ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS OMPRAKASH SHANKARRAO PIND AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6126 OF 2009 IN FA/1953/2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS ISMAIL MEHEBOOB SAHEB SHAIKH AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1950 OF 2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT LATUR VERSUS VENKAT BHIMRAO RUEKAR AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1954 OF 2013 THE EXE ENGINEER MEDIUM PROJECT VERSUS ANNARAO DIGAMBER PATIL AND ANR … Ms. Madhubala Gangwal Patni, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. S. S. Dande, AGP for Respondent-State. ... Tauseef 4 of 4 15-FA.1949.2013 CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 2nd JULY, 2026 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellants/State. 2. By these appeals, the Appellants are assailing the Judgments and awards dated 27.03.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Nilanga, District Latur in LAR Nos.30/1998, 33/1998, 28/1998, 31/1998, 29/1998 and 196/1998. 3. Learned AGP submits that the compensation granted by the learned Reference Court is within four times the compensation granted by the SLAO. 4. In fact the State Government vide Government Resolution No.Sankirna-2014/Prak.Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4 dated 03.11.2016 with Corrigendum dated 23.02.2017 and 13.08.2018 to the said Government Resolution, took a decision not to challenge the reference, if compensation is enhanced only upto four times. 5. Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the impugned orders. Hence, the present Appeals are dismissed. 6. In view of dismissal of the Appeals, pending Civil Applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of accordingly. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Tauseef