Gajanan Shankar Tambutkar and ors vs M/s. S.D.O. Land Acquisition Mahad Division and ors — 66/2020

Case under Land Acquisition Act Section 28 A (3). Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 02nd May 2026.

Case disposed

L.A.R. - Land Ref.

CNR: MHRG190010372023

Filing Number

66/2020

Filing Date

07-Dec-2020

Registration No

66/2020

Registration Date

08-Dec-2020

Court

Court of Civil Judge S.D. Mahad

Judge

1-Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

Decision Date

02-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Land Acquisition Act Section 28 A (3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Gajanan Shankar Tambutkar and ors

    Adv. Navale B. T.

  2. 2.Dipak Shankar Tambutkar

  3. 3.Asmita Anil Kirdavkar

  4. 4.Isha @ Ratnaprabha Viswas Sutar

  5. 5.Usha Dhondu Nigadekar

  6. 6.Manish Ganesh Sutar

  7. 7.Shanta Suresh Walavankar

  8. 8.Ankush Raman Tamhankar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M/s. S.D.O. Land Acquisition Mahad Division and ors

  2. 2.M/s Collector Alibag - Raigad

  3. 3.Exe. Engineer Hetawane Kalawa division

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-May-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  3. 02-May-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: LAR No. 66/2020 Court Decision The Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mahad partly allowed the reference and enhanced land compensation from the original award amount to Rs. 700/- per sq. meter for agricultural land acquired at Karanjadi village. The court found the original compensation inadequate and not reflective of prevailing market value, while rejecting the applicants' claim for Rs. 1,000/- per sq. meter as excessive. Key Reasoning The court held that the Special Land Acquisition Officer erred by: (1) grouping lands based on outdated revenue assessment rather than actual market conditions; (2) relying solely on government "ready reckoner" rates; and (3) ignoring comparable sale transactions and the land's non-agricultural development potential near M.I.D.C. Mahad. The court applied a 65% deduction for development costs from comparable sales, arriving at Rs. 700/- per sq. meter as fair market value. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 02-May-2026

    Disposed

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  5. 08-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  6. 02-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  7. 23-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  8. 23-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  9. 12-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  10. 26-Feb-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  11. 26-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  12. 15-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  13. 18-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  14. 20-Nov-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  15. 30-Oct-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  16. 09-Oct-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  17. 20-Sep-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  18. 20-Sep-2025

    Issues

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  19. 19-Sep-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  20. 18-Sep-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  21. 14-Aug-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  22. 24-Jul-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  23. 03-Jul-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  24. 12-Jun-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  25. 15-Apr-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  26. 10-Apr-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  27. 20-Mar-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  28. 06-Mar-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  29. 06-Feb-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  30. 19-Dec-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  31. 24-Oct-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  32. 01-Aug-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  33. 27-Jun-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  34. 18-Apr-2024

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  35. 07-Mar-2024

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  36. 09-Dec-2023

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  37. 07-Dec-2023

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  38. 23-Nov-2023

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  39. 09-Nov-2023

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  40. 19-Oct-2023

    Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

    Civil Judge Senior Division, Mahad

  41. 05-Oct-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  42. 07-Dec-2020

    Case filed

    Registration No. 66/2020

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: LAR No. 66/2020 Court Decision The Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mahad partly allowed the reference and enhanced land compensation from the original award amount to Rs. 700/- per sq. meter for agricultural land acquired at Karanjadi village. The court found the original compensation inadequate and not reflective of prevailing market value, while rejecting the applicants' claim for Rs. 1,000/- per sq. meter as excessive. Key Reasoning The court held that the Special Land Acquisition Officer erred by: (1) grouping lands based on outdated revenue assessment rather than actual market conditions; (2) relying solely on government "ready reckoner" rates; and (3) ignoring comparable sale transactions and the land's non-agricultural development potential near M.I.D.C. Mahad. The court applied a 65% deduction for development costs from comparable sales, arriving at Rs. 700/- per sq. meter as fair market value. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case