LADHARAM ARJUN PATEL vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — WP/413/2015

Case under Land Acquisition Act 1894 - Writ Pet. Disposed: --DISPOSED OFF on 07th May 2026.

CNR: HCBM030103692014

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

05th May 2015

Filing Number

WP/7961/2014

Filing Date

24-03-2014

Registration No

WP/413/2015

Registration Date

12-01-2015

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OFF

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act 1894 - Writ Pet
Constitution of India

Petitioner(s)

LADHARAM ARJUN PATEL

Adv. Kale Ajeet B.

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Adv. PATIL JIWAN J. FOR R.NO. 2,DESHMUKH SHAMBHURAJE V FOR R.NO. 2 1123

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR

22-12-2016

FOR ORDERS (CIVIL)

16-06-2015

DUE ADMISSION -CIVIL

05-05-2015

URGENT CIRCULATION (WP)

22-02-2017

URGENT CIRCULATION (WP)

17-04-2020

FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]

Orders

07-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR

CASE SUMMARY: WP/413/2015 - LADHARAM ARJUN PATEL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA The court dismissed consolidated writ petitions challenging a 2006 land acquisition award by CIDCO for road widening. The petitioners argued procedural defects including inadequate notice and absence of compensation payment. The court held that the MRTP Act acquisition cannot be judged by strict Land Acquisition Act standards, petitioners had constructive knowledge via publication, substantial compliance was shown, and delay/laches bars relief. Compensation was deposited in court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: WP/413/2015 - LADHARAM ARJUN PATEL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA The court dismissed consolidated writ petitions challenging a 2006 land acquisition award by CIDCO for road widening. The petitioners argued procedural defects including inadequate notice and absence of compensation payment. The court held that the MRTP Act acquisition cannot be judged by strict Land Acquisition Act standards, petitioners had constructive knowledge via publication, substantial compliance was shown, and delay/laches bars relief. Compensation was deposited in court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case