Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. The records, particularly the Order dt.10.02.2020 reveals that the learned counsel for MMRDA had made a statement that an amount of Rs.6,33,07,920/- would be paid to the Applicants/Plaintiffs without prejudice to its rights and contention for seeking possession of the acquired land admeasuring 594 sq. meters of plot bearing No.442/A/3/1/E and 46.25 sq. meters of land from plot no.458 (part). Learned counsel for the MMRDA further stated that an area admeasuring 136.25 sq. meters from Plot No.442/A/3/1/E was already acquired by the State Government. The MMRDA sought possession of the said portion of the land and made a statement that it is willing to deposit an amount of Rs.1,58,52,442/- in respect of the said land, though it is not liable to pay the said amount. It was stated that the MMRDA would approach the State Government in respect of the said payment.

P.H. Jayani/ Salgaonkar IA2821.2021 IN FA.doc

10. In view of the said statement, this Court directed the MMRDA to release an amount of Rs.6,33,07,920/- in favour of the Applicants/plaintiffs with further directions to MMRDA to deposit an amount of Rs.1,58,52,442/- without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties. This Court directed that upon receipt of payment of Rs.6,33,07,920/-, the Court Receiver shall stand discharged in respect of the land admeasuring 594 sq. meters from CTS No. 442/A/3/1/E and 46.25 sq. meters from CTS No.458 (part), and directed the Receiver to hand over possession of the said land to MMRDA as per demarcation at site. It was stated that in view of the above, the Applicants/plaintiffs would not challenge validity of the Award.

16. There is no dispute about the area of the land acquired by the MMRDA. It is also not in dispute that the MMRDA has already paid to the Applicants/plaintiffs an amount of Rs.6,33,07,920/- in respect of land admeasuring 62.39 sq. meters from CTS No.458 Part and 738.18 sq. meters from CTS No.442 A/3/1/E and the Receiver has already handed over possession of the said land to the MMRDA and the Receiver has been discharged in respect of the said land.

17. The dispute is relating to payment of compensation in respect of land admeasuring 136 sq. mtrs from CTS No. 442/A/3/1/E. The MMRDA has questioned the entitlement of the Applicants/plaintiffs to receive compensation in respect of the said portion of the land on the ground that the said land was already acquired by the Government. The State Government had not claimed right in respect of the said land at any point of time. As noted above, the suit was decreed in favour of the Applicants/plaintiffs and by order dated 26/11/2018 in First Appeal No.423 of 2003, the Court Receiver was directed to handover physical possession of the suit property to the Applicants/plaintiffs. The Applicants/plaintiffs were therefore entitled for P.H. Jayani/ Salgaonkar IA2821.2021 IN FA.doc possession of the suit property including the said portion of land admeasuring 136.25 sq. mtrs. It was only in view of the application filed by the MMRDA that this Court with consent of the parties had directed demarcation of the land acquired by MMRDA and despite order dated 26.11.2018 this Court directed the Court Receiver to put MMRDA in possession of land admeasuring 136.25 sq. mtrs., on deposit of compensation before the Court. Pursuant to the said order, the Court Receiver has put MMRDA in possession of the said portion of land, and stands discharged in respect of the said land. In such circumstances, having taken possession of the land admeasuring 136.25 sq. mtrs from the Court Receiver, the MMRDA cannot be prima facie absolved of its liability to pay the compensation to the Applicants/plaintiffs in respect of the said land.

18. The issues raised by the MMRDA as well as by the State Government in Interim Application No.1 of 2019 have absolutely no nexus with the issues involved in the appeal and cannot be adjudicated in this interim application filed in a disposed of appeal. As regards the claim of the Applicants/plaintiffs for the balance amount of Rs.23,80,042/-, the MMRDA has explained that the actual amount payable towards the area of 136.25 sq mtrs. is 1,34,72,400/- and that the statement that the amount of Rs. 1,58,52,448/- would be deposited was made in view of erroneous calculation. Needless to state that it is not within the domain of this Court to decide whether the MMRDA is liable to pay the balance amount of Rs.23,80,042/-, or whether the Applicants/Plaintiffs are entitled for any interest on the amount of P.H. Jayani/ Salgaonkar IA2821.2021 IN FA.doc Rs.1,34,72,400/- or the balance amount of Rs.23,80,042/-. The issues raised by the MMRDA/ State Government as well as by the Applicants/plaintiffs need to be adjudicated in appropriate proceedings and not in these interim applications filed in a disposed of appeal.