Ram s/o Rachappa Hengne vs The State of Maharashtra Through The Collector, Latur and other 4 Advocate - Patil Mahesh K — 15/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING on 06th May 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHLA050001622019
Filing Number
149/2019
Filing Date
16-04-2019
Registration No
15/2019
Registration Date
16-04-2019
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Ahmedpur
Judge
1-Civil Judge Senior Division Ahmedpur
Decision Date
06th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ram s/o Rachappa Hengne
Adv. Murkute Satyavan B
Respondent(s)
The State of Maharashtra Through The Collector, Latur and other 4 Advocate - Patil Mahesh K
Secretary
Adv. Patil Mahesh K_DGP
The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer
Adv. Patil Mahesh K
Vinayak s/o Bapurao Shetkar
Adv. Shelke Vijaykumar S
Sow. Kamal w/o Vinayak Shetkar
Adv. Shelke Vijaykumar S
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Senior Division Ahmedpur
Disposed
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 02-05-2026 | Judgment |
| 30-04-2026 | Judgment |
| 27-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 18-04-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Ram v. State of Maharashtra (RCS 15/2019) Court Decision: The suit was dismissed with each party bearing their own costs. Key Reasoning: The court found that plaintiff Ram failed to establish ownership of the disputed property (Gat No.93) on behalf of the Rajsarathi Co-operative Housing Society members or any entitlement to the land acquisition compensation awarded to defendant No.5. The court determined that defendant No.5 was the legal owner under the Transfer of Property Act and entitled to the compensation, as the property had been properly transferred to her through a registered sale deed. The court also noted the society itself was never registered and the plaintiff provided no documentary evidence (such as sanctioned layout plans or sale deeds of allegedly illegal plots) to support claims of misconduct by defendant No.4. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Ram v. State of Maharashtra (RCS 15/2019) Court Decision: The suit was dismissed with each party bearing their own costs. Key Reasoning: The court found that plaintiff Ram failed to establish ownership of the disputed property (Gat No.93) on behalf of the Rajsarathi Co-operative Housing Society members or any entitlement to the land acquisition compensation awarded to defendant No.5. The court determined that defendant No.5 was the legal owner under the Transfer of Property Act and entitled to the compensation, as the property had been properly transferred to her through a registered sale deed. The court also noted the society itself was never registered and the plaintiff provided no documentary evidence (such as sanctioned layout plans or sale deeds of allegedly illegal plots) to support claims of misconduct by defendant No.4. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts