Babruwan Venkoba Yewate vs State of Maharashtra and oths. — 22/2019
Case under Land Acquisition Act Section 18. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.
L.A.R. - Land Acquisition Reference
CNR: MHLA110001562019
Next Hearing
15th June 2026
Filing Number
156/2019
Filing Date
14-03-2019
Registration No
22/2019
Registration Date
14-03-2019
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Nilanga
Judge
2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Babruwan Venkoba Yewate
Adv. Mane Sunil T
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra and oths.
Executive Engineer Gramin Raste
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
In L.A.R. No.22/2019 (compensation enhancement petition), the court granted respondent No.1's application to file a written statement by setting aside the ex-parte order dated 02/02/2023. Though respondent No.1 failed to appear within the prescribed time after being served summons on 07/11/2019, the court exercised discretion under CCP O-VIII R-1 (treated as directory rather than mandatory) to allow late filing, finding that denying the opportunity would cause irreparable loss to respondent No.1 while causing no prejudice to the claimant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
In L.A.R. No.22/2019 (compensation enhancement petition), the court granted respondent No.1's application to file a written statement by setting aside the ex-parte order dated 02/02/2023. Though respondent No.1 failed to appear within the prescribed time after being served summons on 07/11/2019, the court exercised discretion under CCP O-VIII R-1 (treated as directory rather than mandatory) to allow late filing, finding that denying the opportunity would cause irreparable loss to respondent No.1 while causing no prejudice to the claimant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts