Appa Santu Choukulkar vs The State Of Maharashtra-Collector — 24/2021
Case under Land Acquisition Act Section 5. Status: Steps_Unready. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
L.R.DKST. - Execution of Land Reference Award
CNR: MHKO090002672021
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
389/2021
Filing Date
16-08-2021
Registration No
24/2021
Registration Date
25-08-2021
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Gadhinglaj
Judge
4-
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Appa Santu Choukulkar
Adv. S. B. Patole
Respondent(s)
The State Of Maharashtra-Collector
Sub-Divisional Officer, Gadhinglaj
Execitive Engineer, Irrigation Department Kolhapur
Vithoba Bhagu Choukulkar
Pandurang Pundu Choukulkar
Sitaram Gundu Choukulkar
Mahadev Santu Choukulkar
Babaram Santu Choukulkar
Tanubai Ningoji Patil
Laxmi Dajiba Ilage
Rukmini Rukmana Phatak
Rukmini Nana Phatak
Hearing History
Judge: 4-
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Steps_Unready | |
| 23-12-2025 | Steps_Unready | |
| 04-11-2025 | Steps_Unready | |
| 06-10-2025 | Steps_Unready | |
| 22-07-2025 | Steps_Unready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court clubbed together two execution petitions (L.A.R. No. 23/2021 and 24/2021) filed by the same decree holder through different advocates, directing the decree holder to continue with only one petition and withdraw the other, treating the simultaneous filing as fraud on the court. The court also held that multiple decree holders from the same award cannot file separate execution petitions and suspended payment orders until proper compliance with Order XXI Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure is achieved, requiring all parties and their advocates to sign any payment application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court clubbed together two execution petitions (L.A.R. No. 23/2021 and 24/2021) filed by the same decree holder through different advocates, directing the decree holder to continue with only one petition and withdraw the other, treating the simultaneous filing as fraud on the court. The court also held that multiple decree holders from the same award cannot file separate execution petitions and suspended payment orders until proper compliance with Order XXI Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure is achieved, requiring all parties and their advocates to sign any payment application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts