MANJI JETHA PATEL (DIED) THR. LRS. MANIBEN MANJI PATEL AND OTHERS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — WP/10900/2014
Case under Land Acquisition Act 1894 - Writ Pet. Disposed: --DISPOSED OFF on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030103702014
Next Hearing
05th January 2015
Filing Number
WP/7962/2014
Filing Date
24-03-2014
Registration No
WP/10900/2014
Registration Date
29-11-2014
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
Petitioner(s)
MANJI JETHA PATEL (DIED) THR. LRS. MANIBEN MANJI PATEL AND OTHERS
Adv. Kale Ajeet B.,KALE AJEET B.,KALE AJEET B., ,Kale Ajeet B.
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Adv. G.P. FOR R/1,3 AND 4,PATIL JIWAN J. FOR R.NO. 2,DESHMUKH SHAMBHURAJE V FOR R/2 1123
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR
FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
URGENT CIRCULATION (WP)
FOR ORDERS (CIVIL)
FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH - CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2017 | FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
| 27-04-2015 | URGENT CIRCULATION (WP) |
| 22-12-2016 | FOR ORDERS (CIVIL) |
| 17-04-2020 | FOR ORDERS [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
| 05-01-2015 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH - CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
Orders
Case Summary: WP/10900/2014 Court Decision: The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed all consolidated writ petitions challenging a 2006 land acquisition award for road widening in Tisgaon, Aurangabad. The court found substantial compliance with acquisition procedures under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act and held the acquisition valid. WP/10909/2014 was dismissed with costs of ₹50,000. Key Reasoning: The court determined petitioners had constructive knowledge of acquisition through published notifications and did not suffer prejudice. Under the MRTP Act—a self-contained code distinct from the Land Acquisition Act—provisions allowing acquisition lapse do not apply. Compensation was deposited in court; possession was legally taken via panchanama. Delay of 16 years (1998-2014) and prior dismissed petition by petitioner's brother (suppressed from court) constituted laches defeating the challenge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: WP/10900/2014 Court Decision: The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed all consolidated writ petitions challenging a 2006 land acquisition award for road widening in Tisgaon, Aurangabad. The court found substantial compliance with acquisition procedures under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act and held the acquisition valid. WP/10909/2014 was dismissed with costs of ₹50,000. Key Reasoning: The court determined petitioners had constructive knowledge of acquisition through published notifications and did not suffer prejudice. Under the MRTP Act—a self-contained code distinct from the Land Acquisition Act—provisions allowing acquisition lapse do not apply. Compensation was deposited in court; possession was legally taken via panchanama. Delay of 16 years (1998-2014) and prior dismissed petition by petitioner's brother (suppressed from court) constituted laches defeating the challenge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts