Bhau Tukaram Patil Deceased Through Legal Heir and ors 6(Legal Heir)1. vs Deputy Collector Land Acquisition And Sub Divisional Office Karjat — 36/2025

Case under Land Acquisition Act Section Section- 28 A (3). Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 04th April 2026.

Case disposed

L.A.R. - Land Acquisition Reference

CNR: MHRG040024532025

e-Filing Number

04-05-2025

Filing Number

2591/2025

Filing Date

20-Jun-2025

Registration No

36/2025

Registration Date

20-Jun-2025

Court

Civil Court Senior Division, Panvel

Judge

4-2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

Decision Date

04-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED

Last updated 28-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act Section Section- 28 A (3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Bhau Tukaram Patil Deceased Through Legal Heir and ors 6(Legal Heir)1.

  2. 2.Mr Tanaji Bhau Patil

  3. 3.Sambhaji Dhondu Farat Deceased Through Legal Heir(Legal Heir) 2.

  4. 4.Smt Kusum Sambhaji Farat 2.

  5. 5.Naresh Sambhaji Farat 2.

  6. 6.Ramesh Sambhaji Farat 2.

  7. 7.Lata Ganesh Jadhav 2.

  8. 8.Deepa Ramdas Patil

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Deputy Collector Land Acquisition And Sub Divisional Office Karjat

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary of Court Decision The court partially approved the petitioner's land acquisition reference petition under the Land Acquisition Act. The court determined that the petitioner's agricultural land in Sarasan village, acquired on 10/04/1996 for the Mumbai-Pune expressway, deserved additional compensation of ₹600 per sq.meter plus 30% solatium and interest at statutory rates, instead of the initial award amount. The court found that the special land acquisition officer's original assessment failed to account for the land's non-agricultural potential and development prospects. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  5. 31-Mar-2026

    Judgment

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  6. 24-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  8. 27-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  9. 17-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  10. 24-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  11. 15-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  12. 06-Jan-2026

    EvidenceView PDF

  13. 06-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  14. 22-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  15. 02-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  16. 14-Nov-2025

    Hearing

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  17. 15-Oct-2025

    Hearing

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  18. 03-Oct-2025

    Issues

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  19. 16-Sep-2025

    Written Statement

    2nd CIVIL Judge S.d.panvel

  20. 04-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  21. 20-Jun-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 36/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Court Decision The court partially approved the petitioner's land acquisition reference petition under the Land Acquisition Act. The court determined that the petitioner's agricultural land in Sarasan village, acquired on 10/04/1996 for the Mumbai-Pune expressway, deserved additional compensation of ₹600 per sq.meter plus 30% solatium and interest at statutory rates, instead of the initial award amount. The court found that the special land acquisition officer's original assessment failed to account for the land's non-agricultural potential and development prospects. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case