Anandrao S. Hirekhan and 1(Legal Heir) vs Spl. Land Acq. Officer Advocate - AGP — 100160/2013

Case under Land Acquisition Act Section 18. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

L.A.R. - Land Ref.

CNR: MHNG130016212023

Filing Number

601/2013

Filing Date

14-Jan-2013

Registration No

100160/2013

Registration Date

18-Nov-2013

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ramtek

Judge

17-Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 24-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act Section 18

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Anandrao S. Hirekhan and 1(Legal Heir)

    Adv. P.B. Bante1.

  2. 2.Ratnamala Anandrao Hirekhan

    Adv. Pramod Bhaurao Bante1.

  3. 3.Chandramani Anandrao 1.

  4. 4.Jitendra Anandrao Hirekhan 1.

  5. 5.Hemlata Bandu Gajbhiya 1.

  6. 6.Vidya Sanjay Rangari

  7. 7.Rushi Govinda Hirekhan

    Adv. B.I. Ukey

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Spl. Land Acq. Officer Advocate - AGP

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The Civil Judge Senior Division, Ramtek allowed the reference filed under the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 regarding apportionment of land acquisition compensation of Rs. 8,30,256 for 0.42 hectare of acquired land (Survey No. 23). The court held that the legal heirs of deceased Anandarao (Ratnamala, Chandramani, Jitendra, Hemlata, and Vidhya) are collectively entitled to 50% of the compensation, while the legal heir of deceased Govindrao (Rushikumar) is entitled to the remaining 50%, based on evidence proving both were real brothers and equal co-owners of the ancestral property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Judgment

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  7. 12-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  8. 21-Feb-2026

    Additional Issues

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  9. 31-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  10. 20-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  11. 15-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  12. 18-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  13. 14-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  14. 04-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  15. 23-Sep-2025

    EvidenceView PDF

  16. 23-Sep-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  17. 09-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  18. 12-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  19. 29-Jul-2025

    IssuesView PDF

  20. 29-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  21. 15-Jul-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  22. 01-Jul-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  23. 10-Jun-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  24. 04-Apr-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  25. 04-Apr-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  26. 25-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  27. 13-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  28. 18-Feb-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  29. 23-Jan-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  30. 09-Jan-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  31. 17-Dec-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  32. 12-Nov-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  33. 15-Oct-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  34. 26-Sep-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  35. 05-Sep-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  36. 27-Aug-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  37. 13-Aug-2024

    Compliance

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  38. 30-Jul-2024

    Compliance

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  39. 02-Jul-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  40. 27-Jun-2024

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  41. 27-Jun-2024

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  42. 27-Jun-2024

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  43. 27-Jun-2024

    Compliance

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  44. 11-Jun-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  45. 23-Apr-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  46. 12-Mar-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  47. 06-Feb-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  48. 02-Jan-2024

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  49. 12-Dec-2023

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  50. 07-Nov-2023

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  51. 23-Oct-2023

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  52. 03-Oct-2023

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  53. 12-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  54. 29-Aug-2023

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  55. 08-Aug-2023

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  56. 01-Aug-2023

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  57. 19-Jul-2023

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  58. 26-Jun-2023

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  59. 04-May-2023

    Steps

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  60. 10-Apr-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  61. 14-Jan-2013

    Case filed

    Registration No. 100160/2013

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Civil Judge Senior Division, Ramtek allowed the reference filed under the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 regarding apportionment of land acquisition compensation of Rs. 8,30,256 for 0.42 hectare of acquired land (Survey No. 23). The court held that the legal heirs of deceased Anandarao (Ratnamala, Chandramani, Jitendra, Hemlata, and Vidhya) are collectively entitled to 50% of the compensation, while the legal heir of deceased Govindrao (Rushikumar) is entitled to the remaining 50%, based on evidence proving both were real brothers and equal co-owners of the ancestral property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case