Union of India Through The General Manager Central Railway Mumbai AJAY GAJANAN TALHAR vs Shardabai Jeevan Phad — CA/13438/2024

Case under Land Acquisition Act - Appeal Section 18. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM030447432024

e-Filing Number

17-11-2024

Filing Number

CA/32026/2024

Filing Date

22-Nov-2024

Registration No

CA/13438/2024

Registration Date

12-Dec-2024

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme

Bench Type

Single

Category

LAND ACQUISITION/REQUISITION(CENTRAL/STATE) ( 20 )

Sub-Category

COMPENSATION ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act - Appeal Section 18

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Union of India Through The General Manager Central Railway Mumbai AJAY GAJANAN TALHAR

  2. 2.The Deputy Chief Engineer Construction Central Railway Pune

  3. 3.The State Maharashtra Through the Collector Beed

  4. 4.The Deputy Collector Land Acquisition

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Shardabai Jeevan Phad

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. BrahmeView PDF

    The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of Civil Application No. 13438/2024 on May 4, 2026, by dismissing the pending civil applications as they did not survive following the disposal of the underlying first appeals. The court's order was brief, indicating that the civil applications became infructuous once the main appeals were decided. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2025

    For Orders

    Hon'ble Shri Justice S. G. Chapalgaonkar

  4. 24-Jan-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice S. G. ChapalgaonkarView PDF

  5. 22-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. CA/13438/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of Civil Application No. 13438/2024 on May 4, 2026, by dismissing the pending civil applications as they did not survive following the disposal of the underlying first appeals. The court's order was brief, indicating that the civil applications became infructuous once the main appeals were decided. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case