Raju Laxman Shelke vs The Competent Authority and Special Land Acquisition Officer No 16 Satara — 183/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 21. Status: Filing of Say on Exh___Unready. Next hearing: 07th April 2026.
Spl .Dkst
CNR: MHST190055812023
Next Hearing
07th April 2026
Filing Number
1256/2023
Filing Date
05-08-2022
Registration No
183/2023
Registration Date
25-08-2022
Court
Additional District Court,Wai
Judge
1-District Judge-1, Wai
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Raju Laxman Shelke
Adv. Rokade Manisha Kashinath
Suresh Laxman Shelke
Respondent(s)
The Competent Authority and Special Land Acquisition Officer No 16 Satara
Indian National Highway of India
Adv. Gimawekar C.V
Rohini Dinkar Shelke
Amol Dinkar Shelke
Ashwini Dinkar Shelke
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1, Wai
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Order on Exh
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 13-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 06-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 05-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 21-02-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The application filed by the National Highway Authority of India seeking to prevent issuance of a warrant or keep it in abeyance for 15 days has been rejected. The court found that NHAI failed to comply with the conditional stay order dated 01.04.2024, which required depositing 50% compensation with accrued interest within two months, and no representative appeared for the judgment-debtor during the hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The application filed by the National Highway Authority of India seeking to prevent issuance of a warrant or keep it in abeyance for 15 days has been rejected. The court found that NHAI failed to comply with the conditional stay order dated 01.04.2024, which required depositing 50% compensation with accrued interest within two months, and no representative appeared for the judgment-debtor during the hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts