UTTAMRAO ANNASAHEB CHAVAN (DIED) THR LEGAL HEIRS PRAKASH UTTAMRAO CHAVAN. vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DIST COLLECTOR JALNA AND ORS. — HCBM30129172026

Case under Land Acquisition Act - Appeal Section 18. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.

Next hearing 09-Jun-2026

CNR: HCBM030129172026

Filing Number

FA/9664/2026

Filing Date

01-Apr-2026

Judge

Shri R. A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)

Coram

Shri R. A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)

Bench Type

Single

Category

FIRST APPEAL ( 53 )

Sub-Category

LAND ACQUISITION - SINGLE BENCH ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act - Appeal Section 18

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.UTTAMRAO ANNASAHEB CHAVAN (DIED) THR LEGAL HEIRS PRAKASH UTTAMRAO CHAVAN.

    Adv. Jadhav Kailas B

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DIST COLLECTOR JALNA AND ORS.

  2. 2.THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, (M.I.) JALNA

  3. 3.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NIMNA DUDHANA PROJECT DIVISION, SELU

Case History

  1. 09-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    Shri R. A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)View PDF

    The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) heard First Appeals nos. 9661 and 9664 of 2026 on 09/06/2026. An office objection regarding the absence of the deceased original claimant's surname in the certified copy of judgment was raised and subsequently rectified in the appeal memo. The court waived the objection, finding that the party nomenclature was not affected by the discrepancy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    Objections Not Removed (Second Time)

    Shri Pradeep B. Ghuge (Registrar Judl.)

  4. 05-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 01-Apr-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) heard First Appeals nos. 9661 and 9664 of 2026 on 09/06/2026. An office objection regarding the absence of the deceased original claimant's surname in the certified copy of judgment was raised and subsequently rectified in the appeal memo. The court waived the objection, finding that the party nomenclature was not affected by the discrepancy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case