Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

20841 judgments · newest first · showing 1401–1600

DATTATRAYA BHAGAWAN JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

DISMISSED

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired in 1990 for the Andrud Percolation Tank, arguing that the reference court failed to consider sale transactions from the adjacent village of Nipani and that the land was irrigated, warranting a higher rate of Rs.19,000 per acre. The …

THE STATE OF MAHversusMUKTABAI SOPAN

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra filed several first appeals (Nos. 681, 683, 688, 685, 686, 689 of 2008) against judgments and compensation awards dated 25 January 1996 rendered by the Land Reference Court, District Latur. The State argued that a policy decision of the State Government, embodied in a …

PRAKASH NATH JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

DISMISSED

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired in 1990 for the Andrud Percolation Tank, arguing that the reference court failed to consider sale transactions from the nearby village of Nipani and that the land was irrigated, warranting a higher rate. The Special Land …

SURESH MANOHAR JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

DISMISSED

The appellants challenged the award of compensation for land acquired for the Andrud Percolation Tank, arguing that the reference court failed to consider sale comparables from the adjacent village of Nipani and that the lands were irrigated, warranting a higher rate than the Rs 17,760 per acre …

THE STATE OF MAHversusASHOK SANGAPPA GAOKARE

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra filed several first appeals (Nos. 681, 683, 688, 685, 686, 689 of 2008) against judgments of the Latur Land Reference Court that awarded compensation to various respondents. The State argued that, under a Government Resolution dated 03‑11‑2016 and its corrigendum dated …

PADMAKAR RAMRAO AMBEGAONKARversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellant owned 9.71 hectares of land in Vadgaon, of which 5 hectares were acquired for a percolation tank. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.70,000 per acre, and the appellant sought enhancement under Section 18, relying on a sale deed from a neighboring village as …

PADMAKAR RAMRAO AMBEGAONKARversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

DISMISSED

The appellant owned agricultural land in Vadgaon, Latur, part of which was acquired for a percolation tank. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued in 2000 and an award under Section 11 fixed compensation at Rs.70,300 per hectare. The appellant, dissatisfied, …

THE STATE OF MAHversusMAHESH SUBHASH GAOKARE

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra filed several first appeals (Nos. 681, 683, 688, 685, 686, 689 of 2008) against judgments of the Latur Land Reference Court that awarded compensation to various respondents. The State argued that, per a Government Resolution dated 03‑11‑2016 and its 23‑02‑2017 corrigendum, …

SUNIL JAGANNATH KORDEversusBABABAI JAGANNATH KORDE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Sunil Jagannath Korde, filed a writ petition (WP No. 8585 of 2015) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. On instructions, the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Nitin K Chaudhari, sought leave to withdraw the petition. The Court granted the request and disposed of the writ petition …

M/S SUNIL OIL INDUSTRIES PACHORAversusASHOK HARAKCHAND SANGHAVI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

M/s Sunil Oil Industries filed Contempt Petition No. 112 of 2013 against Ashok Harakchand Sanghavi and others. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the petition had become infructuous because of the lapse of time. The court examined whether the passage of time rendered the petition ineffective. …

DAULAT KISAN JADHAVversusROHAN VITTHAL PATANGE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Daulat Kisan Jadhao, filed Contempt Petition No. 286 of 2019 arising out of Writ Petition No. 12367 of 2018. The Court had earlier passed an order of contempt in the writ petition and subsequently disposed of the writ petition as infructuous. Because the writ petition, which was the …

BILKIS BEGUM W/O MOHAMMAD ABDUL KHUDUSversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants Bilkis Begum and Abdul Khudas Haji Abdul Rahim appealed against 2009 judgments awarding compensation for land acquired in Brahmapuri village for the Godavari River Action Plan. They argued that their cases were identical to those decided in First Appeal No. 379 of 2010, which had …

SUKHADEO CHANGDEO FARTADE AND ANOTHERversusSHIVAJI MARUTI UPASE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The High Court considered three contempt petitions (Nos. 117, 118 and 120 of 2014) arising from an order that directed the respondents, an acquiring body, to decide an application under Section 28‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The respondents produced a letter dated 29‑03‑2014 indicating that …

ASIF SALIM SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The court considered bail applications filed by Asif Salim Shaikh and Kishor alias Pappur Bhand, accused in FIR No. 151/2025 for the murder of Matin, who died from a puncture wound caused by an iron nail. The prosecution alleged that the accused, along with others, assaulted the victim in a temple …

KALYAN MAHADEO JADHAV AND OTHERSversusSHIVAJI MARUTI UPASE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed three contempt petitions alleging non‑compliance with a prior contempt order that directed the respondents, the acquiring authority, to decide an application under Section 28‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The respondents produced a letter dated 29‑03‑2014 indicating that …

LOKYABAI SAMBHAJI PAWARversusMEERABAI SHRIRAM PAWAR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Lokyabai Pawar filed a civil suit seeking possession and injunction over land, alleging encroachment by defendants Meerabai and others. The husband of defendant Meerabai, Shriram, applied under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC to be impleaded as a necessary party, claiming possession of the land, and the …

SHARAD RAMNATH DHAMNEversusSHARAD VASANT BELGE AND ORS

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Sharad s/o Ramnath Dhamne, filed an application seeking the registration of a first appeal. The respondents, Sharad s/o Vasant Belge and others, were duly served but failed to appear before the court. The applicant prayed for condonation of delay and for the appeal to be registered. …

MANISHA RAMESH TAYADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Manisha Ramesh Tayade filed a contempt petition (No. 182 of 2020) arising from a writ petition (No. 10367 of 2019) against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner alleged that a prior order of contempt had not been complied with. The petitioner’s counsel later submitted that the contempt order was …

BAPUSAHEB BAYAJI WALUNJversusRAHUL DWIVEDI COLLECTOR AHMEDNAGAR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Bapusaheb Bayaji Walunj, filed Contempt Petition No. 214 of 2020 (WP/6961/2018) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking enforcement of an earlier contempt order against the Collector, Ahmednagar and others. The respondent filed a compliance affidavit stating that the …

ARJUN BALASAHEB KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants filed several first appeals (Nos. 964-969 of 2019) against the State of Maharashtra. In the course of the proceedings, a typographical error was identified in the chart of First Appeal No. 966, where the land area was recorded as "8 R" instead of the correct "80 R". The appellants, …

DATTA GANGADHAR KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants filed several first appeals against the State of Maharashtra. In First Appeal No. 966 of 2019, a typographical error in the judgment recorded the land area as "8 R" instead of the correct "80 R". The appellants, through counsel G. K. Sontakke, moved the court to correct this error. …

RAMCHANDRA GANGADHAR KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants filed a motion before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking correction of a typographical error in the chart of First Appeal No. 966 of 2019, where the land area was recorded as "8 R" instead of the correct "80 R". The learned Advocate for the appellants, G. K. Sontakke, …

ANAND BALASAHEB KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants filed a motion before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking correction of a typographical error in the chart of the order dated 1 October 2026. The chart erroneously recorded the area of land in First Appeal No. 966 of 2019 as “8 R” instead of the correct “80 R”. The …

PAWANDEEPSINGH MAHENDRASINGH KOHLIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Pawandeep Singh Mahendrasingh Kohli, filed a criminal writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief concerning certain criminal cases. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Chatterji Joydeep, informed the Court that the criminal cases in question had already …

MURLIDHAR KASHINATH RANEversusSHAIKH MOHIMODDIN SHAIKH NABI

DISMISSED

The appellant Murlidhar alleged that the respondent Shaikh purchased bananas worth Rs.3,15,000 and issued a cheque for that amount, which was later dishonoured, leading to prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The respondent contended that the cheque originally bore …

GOUSODDIN KHAJASAB SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, a father, was convicted by a Special Judge for aggravated penetrative sexual assault of his 8‑year‑old daughter under Section 6 read with Section 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The conviction was based on the consistent testimonies of the mother …

RAMESHWAR BHARAT KEDARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The petitioner sought quashing of FIR No. 601/2022 and the charge‑sheet under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC, alleging that he merely obtained his wife's bank statements and that no dishonest intention or wrongful gain existed. The State argued that the petitioner forged his wife's signature and …

GOPAL RAMRAO SHINDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, considered a large group of writ petitions (numbers 904‑931) that raised the issue of whether Medical Officers are entitled to engage in private practice and receive a Non‑Practising Allowance. The Court noted that the matter had already been decided in a …

GODAWARI KHORE SAHAKARI DUDH SANGH MARYADITversusSHOBHA VISHNU KOTE AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, Godawari Khore Sahakari Dudh Sangh Maryadit, filed a first appeal against Shobha Vishnu Kote and others. During the pendency, Respondent No. 4 attained majority, prompting a request to correct the title clause, which the court permitted. Subsequently, the appellant’s counsel submitted …

Dagaduba Jijaram NirmaleversusThe Executive Engineer

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants, who lost land in 2008 due to compulsory acquisition, sought enhanced compensation as determined by a Reference Court and applied to withdraw the amount deposited by the acquiring body. The acquiring body contested, arguing that interest should accrue from the date of possession and …

JAVED IKBAL A. MANNAN DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, original claimants whose lands in Mapegaon village were acquired for the Nimna Dudhna Project, challenged the compensation awarded by the Reference Court, alleging it was inadequate. They sought parity by applying a 10% per annum escalation for six years and ten months, contending …

Mahaling Dharmaraj RajmaneversusThe Executive Engineer

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The petitioners, led by Mahaling Dharmaraj Rajmane, sought condonation of delay in filing several civil applications and permission to withdraw a portion of compensation deposited by the acquiring body, MSPGCL, following a reference court award for land acquired in 2008. The respondents argued that …

ANJANABAI TUKARAM PAWAR (DIED) LRS MITRAVANDABAI (DIED) THR LRS GUNABAI (DIED) LRS HARIDAS AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR, LATUR AND OTHERS

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants filed a petition seeking restoration of a First Appeal that had been dismissed because they failed to remove office objections within the prescribed time. They argued that the dismissal resulted from an oversight that prevented the matter from being noticed. The Court condoned any …

RAMANAND CHANDRAKANT KASBEversusPOOJA RAMANAND KASBE

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant sought condonation of a 20‑day delay in filing a criminal revision against a Family Court order directing maintenance of Rs.3000 per month. The High Court had earlier stayed the order on condition that the applicant deposit the outstanding amount and continue paying Rs.3000 monthly. …

MANOJ DAYALDAS KARMANIversusTHE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, listed a large number of writ petitions that seek to challenge the validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act. The listing was done in compliance with a Supreme Court judgment dated 10 April 2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward‑2(1), Chandigarh v. Tej Pratap …

RUKHMINIBAI VISHWANATH DUDHATEversusPIRAJI DIGAMBAR DUDHATE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Rukhminibai Vishwanath Dudhate, filed a regular civil suit seeking to quash an order granting a way through Gut Nos. 309 and 310 and to obtain a permanent injunction against any road from her land in Gut No. 316. The Sub‑Divisional Officer (SDO) later remanded the matter to the …

SANJAY SHIVAJI BANSODEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Sanjay Shivaji Bansode, a manager of a hotel, was charged under Sections 143, 144 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act, 1956 for allegedly procuring girls from Bengal and Bangladesh for prostitution. The …

VIDYASAGAR SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL JALNAversusSTATE OF MAHA and ORS

DISPOSED OFF

Vidyasagar Shikshan Prasarak Mandal filed a writ petition (No. 1623 of 2005) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra and others. The petitioner, through counsel, later submitted a communication dated 31 August 2026 indicating that the petition …

GANPAT AMBADAS MUNTODEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Ganpat Ambadas Muntode filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging an action of the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner’s counsel later informed the court that the petition had become infructuous. The court examined the claim of infructuity. Since no …

LAXMAN TIMA DANDGULE L.RS. SONABAI and OTHERSversusHARIBHAU GOMA PAWAR and ORS

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The appeal (Second Appeal No. 1614 of 2005) was pending before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The appellants filed Civil Application No. 10704 of 2025 seeking an early hearing of the appeal. The court examined whether the application for early fixation should be granted. The bench allowed …

DNYANESHWAR RAMESH RAUT AND OTHERSversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the Union of India and others. The petitioners' counsel argued that the petition should be entertained, but the court noted that a considerable passage of time and subsequent developments had …

NANDU MOHAN KARDILEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The appellant, the biological father, was convicted by a Special Judge for offences under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and Section 376(2)(f)(i)(n) of the IPC for repeatedly raping his minor daughter. The appellant appealed, arguing lack of …

ANURADHA KAKASAHEB TUPE AND OTHERSversusJANARDHAN RANGNATH TUPE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed Civil Suit No.164 of 2021 seeking a temporary injunction under Order XXIX Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the CPC. The trial court rejected the injunction application, and the district court dismissed the subsequent appeal. Dissatisfied, the petitioners filed a writ …

GANESH RANGNATH DANDGE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, in Sessions Case No. 67 of 2017 for offences under IPC Sections 307, 143, 147, 452 and 323 read with 149, and were sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. They filed a criminal application seeking suspension of …

THE STATE OF MAH THR. COLLECTOR LATUR AND ORSversusCHANDBEE ABDUL SHAIKH

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra, through the Collector of Latur, filed several civil applications (Nos. 3687‑3697 of 2012) and corresponding first appeals (Nos. 1413‑1419 of 2018) against Narsing Pandurang Alange. The matters were listed before this Court and were argued by Shri V. M. Chate (AGP) for the …

TADVI AHEMODODDIN WAHIDODDINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Tadvi Ahemododdin Wahidoddin filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking leave to withdraw the petition. The petitioner requested that the court allow the withdrawal and grant liberty to pursue any appropriate legal remedy thereafter. The respondent State …

GORAKH GANGARAM DHARAMversusSANGITA GORAKH DHARAM

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Gorakh Gangaram Dham, filed a writ petition challenging an order. The petitioner claimed that the arrears in question had already been paid and the order had been implemented. The court examined the claim and found that the arrears were indeed cleared. Consequently, the court held …

DNYANDEO VASANT VISPUTEversusMOTIRAM GANGADHAR KARHALE AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Dnyandeo Vasant Vispute, challenged a trial court order that allowed an amendment to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, filed by the respondents. The amendment, granted on 12 October 2023, sought to declare the complainant as the proprietor of Shraddha …

RAMESH RAMBHAU MOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 1537-2481 of 2008) were filed in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, against the State of Maharashtra and its officials. The petitioners sought various reliefs, but their counsel submitted that the matters had become infructuous. The court, after …

SHAKUNTALA WALJI JAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions filed in 2008 by various individuals and entities against the State of Maharashtra were before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioners, represented by Mr. Ajay Deshpande and Mr. C. C. Deshpande (on behalf of Mr. C. R. Deshpande), submitted that the …

ANANDA SHRAVAN CHOUDHARIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 1537‑2479 of 2008) were filed in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, by various petitioners against the State of Maharashtra and its officials. The petitioners sought relief through writs, but later, through their counsel, submitted that the matters had …

Rajaram Sukhdeo VaidyaversusSau Baby Bhimraj Rahinj

DISMISSED

The appellant, Rajaram Sukhdeo Vaidya, filed a suit seeking a declaration that a sale deed dated 21 September 1999 was null and void for being executed without consideration. The trial court and the first appellate court dismissed the suit, holding that the appellant failed to prove the deed’s …

JAGANNATH SHAMRAO PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 1537-2481 of 2008) were filed by various individuals and entities against the State of Maharashtra and its officials. The petitioners, through counsel Mr. Ajay Deshpande and Mr. C.C. Deshpande, submitted that the matters raised in the petitions had become …

PRASHANT LOTAN SANERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 1537 to 2481 of 2008) were filed in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, by various petitioners against the State of Maharashtra and its officials. The petitioners, represented by Mr. Ajay Deshpande and Mr. C.C. Deshpande (on behalf of Mr. C.R. …

SANTOSH KUNDANLALJAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 1537‑2479 of 2008) were filed in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, by various petitioners against the State of Maharashtra and its officials. The petitioners sought relief but did not specify substantive grounds in the excerpt. Counsel for the …

VIJAY NAGINDAS JAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 1537‑2478 of 2008) were filed by various petitioners against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petitioners, through counsel Mr. Ajay Deshpande and Mr. C. C. Deshpande (h/f Mr. C. R. Deshpande), submitted that the matters had become infructuous. The …

GANESH SHRIRANG SHEMBDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The appellant, Ganesh, appealed his conviction under Section 377 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly penetrating a mentally disabled minor. The trial court had found the victim to be under 18, mentally retarded, and corroborated his testimony with medical evidence of anal …

SUMAN MANGA SONARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions (numbers 2455 to 2481 of 2008) were filed by various individuals and entities against the State of Maharashtra and its officials. The petitioners sought relief through the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. During proceedings, counsel for the petitioners …

PANDHARINATH DAYARAM WANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions filed in 2008 by various individuals and entities against the State of Maharashtra and others were before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioners, represented by Mr. Ajay Deshpande and Mr. C. C. Deshpande (h/f Mr. C. R. Deshpande), sought relief …

DEVRAO BHUJANGRAO PHUKEversusGURULING KASHINATH PIMPALAE and ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Guruling Kashinath Pimpale, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. During the pendency of the petition, subsequent developments occurred that rendered the petition irrelevant. The petitioner, …

BALAJI LALU WAGHMAREversusSTATE OF MAH THRU DIST. COLLECTOR NANDED AND ORS.

DISPOSED OFF

A large number of first‑appeal petitions filed by land‑acquisition claimants against the State of Maharashtra were listed before the National Lok Adalat of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The claimants sought enhanced compensation for fruit‑bearing trees affected by the acquisition. The Lok …

BHAURAO MUKINDA KAWALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

A large number of first‑appeal petitions filed by land‑acquisition claimants against the State of Maharashtra were brought before the National Lok Adalat of the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench. The claimants sought enhanced compensation for fruit‑bearing trees under the land‑acquisition …

RAMA MALHARI DANGREversusSTATE OF MAH THRU DIST. COLLECTOR NANDED AND ORS.

DISPOSED OFF

Multiple appellants filed first appeals before the National Lok Adalat of the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench, seeking enhancement of compensation for fruit‑bearing trees following land acquisition by the State of Maharashtra. The parties, represented by counsel, presented settlement …

BHAGWAT KASHINATH PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Bhagwat Kashinath Patil filed a contempt petition seeking enforcement of an order directing the State to pass an award under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act and to pay rental compensation. The court noted that the Collector had already decided the rental compensation and the award …

THE MANAGER, SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO LTDversusMANISHA KAILAS BADHE AND ORS

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Manager of Shriram Transport Finance Co Ltd filed a first appeal (No. 2857 of 2024) against Manisha Kailas Badhe and others. Along with the appeal, the appellant submitted a civil application seeking a stay of execution of the impugned judgment and award. The appellant contended that the entire …

ARUN RAOJI BODKHEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

ABATED

The applicant, Arun Raoji Bodkhe, filed a criminal revision application which remained pending when he died on 04-02-2023. The applicant's counsel submitted a photocopy of the death certificate, which the court marked as evidence. The court considered whether the pending revision could continue …

Rajesh Umakantappa MendkudaleversusThe Executive Enginee

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant sought condonation of a 344‑day delay in filing an appeal, citing administrative reasons, and the court found the case made out and condoned the delay. The applicant also applied to withdraw the compensation amount deposited by the acquiring body following a reference court award, …

Bhaskar Kondiba MundeversusThe Executive Engineer

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Bhaskar Kondiba Munde, sought condonation of a 371‑day delay in filing an appeal, arguing administrative reasons for the lapse. The court found the explanation satisfactory and condoned the delay. The applicant also applied to withdraw part of the compensation amount deposited by the …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHERversusPARAJI JABA NARHE

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The State of Maharashtra appealed a reference court order that had enhanced compensation for land acquired in 1993 for a minor irrigation tank. The land, 11 roods from Gat No. 203 in Dhoki village, was taken under a notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Special Land …

PRAKASH SHESHRAO ATOLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Prakash Atole and applicant Dattatraya Atole filed a criminal writ petition and a criminal application respectively, seeking quashment of proceedings against them by the State of Maharashtra. Both parties claimed an amicable settlement and filed affidavits indicating that the informants …

VISHNUDAS KESHAVRAO CHATEversusKAMALBAI VISHNUDAS CHATE AND AOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, Vishnudas Keshavrao Chate, filed an appeal in the Family Court at Aurangabad. The appellant's counsel was absent at the hearing despite a prior order warning that a further absence would lead to dismissal. No reason was provided for the continued non‑appearance, and the court inferred …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusANNA FAKIRA GULVE

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed the judgment of the Reference Court which had enhanced compensation for six ropani of land acquired for a water tank, adding a Rs.3,550 per ropani amount and a 10% escalation. The State argued that the original award of Rs.9,267 by the Land Acquisition Officer was …

ANIL NAROTTAM PATIL and ORS.versusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State acquired land in Shahada, Dhule for a bus stand and depot in 1992, awarding compensation of Rs 40‑50 per square metre. The original claimants challenged the award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, alleging inadequate compensation, and the reference court enhanced the rate to Rs …

NATHA KABHU SONNAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Natha Kabhu Sonnar and others, filed a criminal writ petition against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners and the informant/victim reached a voluntary settlement and jointly requested the court to allow the petition, offering to deposit Rs.10,000 to the High Court Bar …

RADHABAI PRABHULAL JAISWALversusTHE ADMINISTRATOR CIDCO CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Administrator CIDCO deposited Rs.1,18,70,800 and sought to withdraw the amount. The Court noted that the Respondent had previously deposited only 70% of the amount as ordered, and followed its established practice of allowing claimants to receive 70% of the deposited sum with interest upon …

BALAJI MAROTRAO SARSEversusRAMRAO MAROTRAO SARSE AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The appellant, Balaji Marotrao Sarse, objected to the payment of compensation to respondent No.1 for land acquired for the Isapur Right Canal project. He had earlier consented to release an advance amount to the same respondent and claimed that a compromise decree in a 1998 suit established his …

FATRU ALIKHAN KHADAR ALIKHAN LASHKARI THROUGH LRS JULEKHABI FATRU ALI KHAN AND OTHERSversusISHRAT ALIKHAN KHADAR ALIKHAN LASHKARI THROUGH LRS KHAMRAMUNNISA ISHRAT ALI LASHKARI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners challenged a judgment dated 31‑August‑2019 in which a Junior Division Civil Judge set aside an ex‑parte decree in a partition suit (Civil Suit No.141/2002). The original suit had proceeded ex‑parte against 27 defendants, some of whom were not properly served. The respondents filed …

UDDHAVRAO MAKKANRAO JAMBHALE AND ORS.versusKAILAS GOTYA BHIL AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, heard Civil Application No. 2959 of 2026 filed by Uddhavrao Makk... and others against Kailas Gotya B... and others. The applicant was represented by Mr. Pramod C. Mayure. After considering the reasons set out in the application, the court allowed the …

KISHOR ALIAS PAPPU PRAKASH BHANDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The court considered bail applications filed by Asif Salim Shaikh and Kishor alias Pappur Bhand, accused in FIR No. 151/2025 for the murder of Matin by a puncture wound from an iron nail. The prosecution argued the offence was serious, supported by post‑mortem evidence and an eyewitness statement. …

SUMITRA NARHARIRAO JAGTAPversusDIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Sumitra Narharirao Jagtap, filed a writ petition challenging a decision of the Divisional Commissioner. The respondent side included the Divisional Commissioner and other officials. Both parties agreed that due to the passage of time, the subject matter of the petition had become …

MOHAN KISAN CHAVHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The applicants, Mohan Kisan Chavhan and others, challenged the Special Judge's order rejecting their application for discharge in a criminal case. They argued that the proper remedy was to file an appeal under Section 14(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code and sought permission to withdraw the …

KETAN CHATRABHUJ GHADGEversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, a large group of junior engineers and other staff appointed under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) between 2007‑2012, sought regularisation, creation of permanent posts and payment of arrears, arguing that their work is of a perennial nature and that the Maharashtra …

NAMDEO BABURAO MALI AND ANOTHERversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, a large group of junior engineers and other staff appointed under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) between 2007 and 2012, sought regularisation, creation of permanent posts and arrears of salary, arguing that their work is continuous and the scheme has been renamed but …

VILAS ASHOK NIWAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Vilas Ashok Niware, filed an anticipatory bail application (Criminal Application No. 797 of 2026) seeking permission to assist the prosecution. The High Court, after considering the application, allowed the request and disposed of the matter. The decision was delivered by Justice …

ASHOK FAKIRRAO BAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants filed a criminal application seeking quashment of FIR No.580/2018, which alleged offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC, and a related regular criminal case. The parties later reached an amicable settlement, executed a joint affidavit of …

VISHNUDAS @ VISHNU S/O RANGRAO DARADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

Vishnudas Darade was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class for offences under IPC sections 353 and 341, based on the testimony of five witnesses, including the complainant, a MSEB employee, and three eye‑witnesses who saw him assault and restrain them while they were collecting …

VISHWAS SAMPAT DABHADE AND ANOTHERversusKAJAL LAXMAN DABHADE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The appellants and respondents reached a compromise, which was verified by the Court's Registrar on 21 September 2026 and recorded as document X‑1. The respondents filed an affidavit (X‑2) confirming that two of the respondents, Gayatri Laxman Dabhade and Aarti Laxman Dabhade, are minors and that …

RAMESHWAR VISHNU POULversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The applicant, Rameshwar Vishnu Poul, filed Criminal Application No. 802 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. He later sought the Court's permission to withdraw the application. The learned counsel for the applicant made the request on his instructions. The Court considered …

DIGVIJAY BHASKAR LAWANDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Digvijay Bhaskar Lawand, challenged an order dated 12 November 2025 issued by the Divisional Deputy Director of Education, Latur. He claimed the order adversely affected him and sought relief through a writ petition. The State of Maharashtra responded, citing a Government Resolution …

ALIM RAHIM SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Alim Rahim Shah applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in Crime No.0059/2025 concerning a large seizure of contraband gutkha. The prosecution’s case rests solely on the statement of a co‑accused, alleging Shah to be a supplier, with no other material linking him to the offence. Shah contended …

SATISH NIVRUTTI CHAVANversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Satish Nivrutti Chavan, challenged the order dated 26‑02‑2007 of the Scrutiny Committee which invalidated his claim of belonging to the Thakar Scheduled Tribe. He argued that, during the pendency of the writ petition, he obtained his grandfather's school records and other …

ALIM RAHIM SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Alim Rahim Shah applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving the seizure of large quantities of contraband gutkha. The FIR alleged his involvement based solely on a co-accused's statement, with no other evidence linking him to the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and …

NANDA RAVINDRA NAIKversusSANDEEP SHEKHAR SUHAS RATHOD AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant filed a civil application seeking condonation of a five‑day delay in filing a review application challenging an amendment to the defendants' written statement. The amendment altered the defendants' earlier admission that the disputed property was ancestral, introducing a contradictory …

MOHD ABDUL QUADEER MOHD ABDUL KHALILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Mohd Abdul Quadeer, filed a contempt petition (No. 246 of 2013) alleging that the State of Maharashtra had failed to decide a proposal concerning his deemed date of promotion, despite an earlier order dated 20 April 2012 directing the respondent to do so. The proposal was forwarded …

RAMKRUSHNA SHAHURAO MISALversusOMPRAKASH GUPTA

DISPOSED OFF

Ramkrushna Shahur... filed a contempt petition (No. 97 of 2026) against Omprakash Gupta. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the order of contempt had been complied with. The court, after noting the compliance, found no remaining issue in the petition. Consequently, the court disposed of the …

SARJERAO DAGDU GAVHANE AND OTEHRSversusBABASAHEB VITTHAL GORDE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners challenged the Tahsildar's order dated 30.03.2016 that rejected an application filed by respondents under section 5(2) of the Mamlatdar's Courts Act, 1906, a decision later affirmed by the Sub‑Divisional Officer. The petitioners argued that the Tahsildar’s finding of a road between …

SHANTARAM TANKU WAGHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Shantanu Tanku Wagh filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra and others. The respondents submitted that a No Dues Certificate had already been issued in favour of the petitioner, rendering the petition moot. The court considered whether any …

MANIK DEORAO BARGAJE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Manik Deorao Bargaje and another, filed a contempt petition against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners did not appear before the Court. The Attorney General for the State informed the Court that respondent No.4 had deposited Rs.5,48,134 in the account of petitioner No.2, …

GOVIND LAXMAN PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAH

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The land of Govind Laxman Pawar was acquired in 1993 for the Sarvadi Medium Project and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation that the claimant alleged was inadequate, especially for trees and structures. The claimant relied on a 1991 sale of 18 Are and valuation reports to seek enhanced …

ANJALI VISHAL WAGHversusVISHAL RANGNATH WAGH AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Anjali Vishal Wagh filed a criminal application and appeal against Vishal Rangnath Wagh and the State. During proceedings, a police communication confirmed that Vishal Rangnath Wagh had died on 16 June 2025, a fact not contested by either party. The court held that the death of the accused …

KIRAN RAOSAHEB JAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

Kiran applied for bail before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging his detention by the State of Maharashtra. The court appeared reluctant to grant bail, prompting the applicant's counsel to seek permission to withdraw the application while reserving the right to file a fresh bail …

REHAYANA HAIDARKHAN SHAIKH AND OTHERSversusASLAM YUNUS SHAIKH AND ORS

Withdrawn

The petitioners, Rehiyana Haiderkhan Shaikh and others, filed a civil application seeking permission to withdraw the balance of an amount deposited by an insurance company after the disposal of a first appeal filed by that insurer. The respondents, including Aslam Yunus Shaikh and others, argued …

JALINDAR TATYABA DESHMUKH AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, a group of agricultural landowners in Beed district, appealed against a Land Reference Court judgment that awarded them compensation for lands acquired for the Gunwati Brihat Laghu Sinchan Project. They contended that the compensation was far below market value, especially because …

YOGESH VITTHAL CHAVANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The applicant, Yogesh Vitthal Chavan, filed an application seeking cancellation of bail No. 43 of 2026. The applicant later requested leave to withdraw this application and asked for liberty to file an appropriate application before the Sessions Court for cancellation of bail. The respondent State …