REGENCY INC vs COLLECTOR DISTRICT THANE AND ORS — WP/5536/2026
Case under Mah. Land Revenue Code, 1966 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 27th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM010193812026
Filing Number
WP/11305/2026
Filing Date
17-04-2026
Registration No
WP/5536/2026
Registration Date
22-04-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Bench Type
Single
Category
LAND REVENUE CODE MATTERS ( 57 )
Sub-Category
Single Bench ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
REGENCY INC
Adv. Druti Datar
Respondent(s)
COLLECTOR DISTRICT THANE AND ORS
TAHSILDAR AND EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE THANE
CIRCLE OFFICER, BELAPUR
NAVI MUMBAI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THRO ITS COMMISSIONER
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
FIRST ON BOARD (FOB)
FOR ORDERS--
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | FIRST ON BOARD (FOB) |
| 27-04-2026 | FOR ORDERS-- |
Orders
Case Summary: Regency Inc v. Collector District Thane (WP 5536/2026) The Bombay High Court allowed Regency Inc's petition, setting aside penalty orders for alleged illegal excavation during construction of the "Regency Palms" project in Thane. The court found that the inspection report and panchanama (official record) on which the ₹5.13 crore penalty was based actually proved the excavated earth remained on-site—not that it was illegally transported—making the penalty legally unsustainable under Section 48(7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Regency Inc v. Collector District Thane (WP 5536/2026) The Bombay High Court allowed Regency Inc's petition, setting aside penalty orders for alleged illegal excavation during construction of the "Regency Palms" project in Thane. The court found that the inspection report and panchanama (official record) on which the ₹5.13 crore penalty was based actually proved the excavated earth remained on-site—not that it was illegally transported—making the penalty legally unsustainable under Section 48(7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts