SAKHARAM MANIK SHINGARE AND ANR. vs THE UNION OF INDIA REP.BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, CENTRAL RAILWAY, MUMBAI — FA/657/2023

Case under Railway Claim Tribunal Act Section 124. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM010240962022

Filing Number

FA/14293/2022

Filing Date

15-Jun-2022

Registration No

FA/657/2023

Registration Date

28-Jun-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Bench Type

Single

Category

COMPENSATION ( 7 )

Sub-Category

RAILWAY ACCIDENT INCLUDING RAILY COMPENSATION ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Railway Claim Tribunal Act Section 124

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAKHARAM MANIK SHINGARE AND ANR.

    Adv. mohan rao

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE UNION OF INDIA REP.BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, CENTRAL RAILWAY, MUMBAI

  2. 2.MANDAKINI SAKHARAM SHINGARE

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. PatilView PDF

    The High Court of Bombay heard First Appeal No. 657/2023 on 6 May 2026, with both parties represented by counsel. The court closed the matter for judgment but the actual order/outcome is not provided in the document—only the procedural note indicating arguments were heard and the case is reserved for judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    For Final Hearing

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

  4. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. PatilView PDF

  5. 05-May-2026

    For Direction

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

  6. 02-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. PatilView PDF

  7. 02-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 15-Jun-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA/657/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay heard First Appeal No. 657/2023 on 6 May 2026, with both parties represented by counsel. The court closed the matter for judgment but the actual order/outcome is not provided in the document—only the procedural note indicating arguments were heard and the case is reserved for judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case