EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BEMBLA PROJECT DIVISION, YAVATMAL vs KAMALABAI W/O DNYANESHWAR KADAM AND OTHERS — FA/990/2019

Case under Land Acquisition Act Section 54R/W96. Next hearing: 04th May 2026.

Next hearing 04-May-2026

CNR: HCBM040214142017

Filing Number

FA/16242/2017

Filing Date

27-Jul-2017

Registration No

FA/990/2019

Registration Date

30-May-2019

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas

Bench Type

Single

Category

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

Sub-Category

COMPENSATION ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 26-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act Section 54R/W96

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BEMBLA PROJECT DIVISION, YAVATMAL

    Adv. PURUSHOTTAM PATIL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KAMALABAI W/O DNYANESHWAR KADAM AND OTHERS

    Adv. FOR R/2 & 3 1123

  2. 2.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA REPRESENTED BY COLLECTOR, YAVATMAL

    Adv. FOR R/2 &

  3. 3.SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BEMBLA PROJECT, YAVATMAL

    Adv. FOR R/2 & 3

Case History

  1. 04-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. VyasView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench dismissed the appeal filed by the Executive Engineer of Bembla Project challenging the Reference Court's Award in a land acquisition case. The court upheld the Reference Court's compensation award of Rs.1,000 per tree for three Ber trees and Rs.4,000 for one Tamarind tree, finding that the claimant's testimony regarding tree valuation was properly considered and that the land compensation fell within acceptable government policy limits (four times the original award). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    For Orders (At-2.30 P.m.)

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas

  4. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. VyasView PDF

  5. 30-Apr-2026

    For Orders-Lar Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas

  6. 16-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. VyasView PDF

  7. 16-Apr-2026

    For Orders-Lar Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas

  8. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. VyasView PDF

  9. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Neeraj P. Dhote

  10. 16-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Neeraj P. DhoteView PDF

  11. 16-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Neeraj P. Dhote

  12. 30-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Neeraj P. DhoteView PDF

  13. 19-Jan-2023

    For Orders -

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. Gharote

  14. 13-Dec-2022

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. GharoteView PDF

  15. 13-Dec-2022

    For Orders - (Civil Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. Gharote

  16. 05-Dec-2022

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. GharoteView PDF

  17. 05-Dec-2022

    For Orders (Civil Side Matters)

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. Gharote

  18. 30-Nov-2022

    For Orders-

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. Gharote

  19. 25-Nov-2022

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. GharoteView PDF

  20. 21-Nov-2022

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Avinash G. GharoteView PDF

  21. 16-Mar-2020

    Order Matters (Regular)

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Murlidhar Ganpatrao Giratkar

  22. 06-Mar-2020

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Murlidhar Ganpatrao GiratkarView PDF

  23. 06-Mar-2020

    Order Matters (Regular)

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Murlidhar Ganpatrao Giratkar

  24. 06-Mar-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 23-Jan-2018

    Registrar(judicial)

  26. 23-Jan-2018

    Registrar(judicial)

  27. 27-Jul-2017

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA/990/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench dismissed the appeal filed by the Executive Engineer of Bembla Project challenging the Reference Court's Award in a land acquisition case. The court upheld the Reference Court's compensation award of Rs.1,000 per tree for three Ber trees and Rs.4,000 for one Tamarind tree, finding that the claimant's testimony regarding tree valuation was properly considered and that the land compensation fell within acceptable government policy limits (four times the original award). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case