Created by Fuzzy Cloud

NEERAJ P DHOTE

93 judgments · newest first · showing 1–93

MARUTI LIMBAJI GOCHADE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed two writ petitions in the Bombay High Court seeking interest payable under Section 80 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The State pointed out that the petitioners had already filed applications …

RUPESH VISHNUDAS MALPANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Rupesh Vishnudas Malpani, filed a criminal writ petition and after cognizance was taken, sought leave to amend his application, relying on a recent Supreme Court judgment (Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra). The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the …

VISHWAS KRISHNA GADKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellant sought enhanced compensation for 1 hectare of land acquired for the Terna Medium Project, arguing that the rate should be Rs 1,250 per R (half of Rs 2,500 per R awarded for irrigated land in a similar acquisition) on the ground of parity. The court examined whether the appellant's dry …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusYASHWANT GOVIND DALAL

DISPOSED OFF

The State acquired lands at village Udatpur, Taluka Lohara, District Osmanabad, for rehabilitation of earthquake-affected persons. Section 4 notification was issued on 07.04.1994 and the award was declared on 23.07.1996. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.17,300 per …

Uttam Bhaulal KuklareversusThe Executive Engineer Minor Irrigation Division No 1

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Uttam Bhaulal Kuklare, filed an application seeking withdrawal of the entire amount deposited by the acquiring body under an award, together with accrued interest. The Court noted a prior order dated 17.10.2024 in Civil Application No. 5331 of 2024, which allowed similarly placed …

SYED TAMKIN @ TAMMA S/O. SYED MATINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition seeking to quash proceedings under several IPC offences (Sections 320, 364, 365, 201, 120-B read with 34) and the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act. No counsel appeared for the petitioner, and the respondent’s counsel informed the court that the …

WASIM BASHIR PATHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash FIR No. 0306/2022, which alleged offences under Sections 498‑A, 494, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The FIR was lodged by the wife of the first petitioner and implicated the …

MUKESH MACHINDRA RAKSHE AND OTHERSversusMACHINDRA LAXMAN RAKSHE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging a district court order that rejected their application for a temporary injunction in a civil matter. The regular civil appeal concerning the same dispute is now scheduled for final arguments. The respondent's counsel did not contest …

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 …

ANIL KANTHIRAM RATHOD AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a criminal writ petition and were granted leave to amend it on 21 August 2024, with an extension of time. The petitioners subsequently sought further time to effect the amendment. The Court examined the request and ordered that the amendment must be completed within one week, …

DATTA S/O SHAMRAO SAKALKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Datta, filed an application seeking condonation of an 846‑day delay in filing a first appeal against the judgment of the lower court. The respondent states were represented by an Additional Government Pleader, while the acquiring body was not present despite service. The court …

BABASAHEB ANANDA MATEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISMISSED

The petitioners, led by Keru Genu Gadekar, filed multiple first appeals against the State of Maharashtra and others. The High Court noted that copies required for service to Respondent No.2 (the Acquiring Body) had not been supplied, preventing issuance of notice. The court ordered that the copies …

KETAN KARBHARI MATEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISMISSED

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, issued a procedural order directing that the copies of the pending appeals be supplied within two weeks, failing which the appeals would be dismissed without further reference. If the copies are supplied within the stipulated period, the Court will issue …

X Y ZversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

A 17-year‑old minor, a victim of rape, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking termination of her 27‑week pregnancy. The medical board, after examination, recommended termination via intra‑cardiac KCl injection, noting the fetus would be non‑viable. The Court, relying on constitutional …

SHRIDHAR MADHAVRAO PATIL AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, original claimants whose lands were acquired for the Borol Storage Tank project in Deoni (Kh), Latur, appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation. They relied on a prior judgment of this Court (25.03.2026) that had increased compensation …

LAXMAN HANMANTRAO GARADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, original claimants whose lands were acquired for the Borol Storage Tank project in Deoni (Kh), Latur, appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation. Earlier reference judgments had awarded Rs 990 per R for jirayat land and Rs 6,400 per R …

GOPAL TUKARAM PATEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, owners of lands acquired for the Borol Storage Tank project, filed first appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation. They relied on a prior judgment of this Court dated 25 March 2026, which had increased compensation for similarly …

RAFFIQUE GAFFAR MEMONversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Raffique Gaffar Memon, filed a criminal writ petition seeking quash of an FIR. The petitioner’s counsel reported that the petitioner could not be contacted and was not responding. The State’s counsel was present. The Court noted that the petitioner was absconding and showed no …

TULJIRAM YEDBA PATULEversusMOHAN BHAGWAT GAIKWAD

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking leave to withdraw the petition and requested that the Civil Judge Junior Division, Paranda, be directed to decide Regular Civil Suit No.392/2014 within three months. The respondent's counsel appeared. The High Court, after noting the petitioner's request, …

HANUMANT KISAN MALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Hanumant Kisan Mali, filed an application seeking condonation of a 1,680‑day delay in filing an appeal for enhanced compensation against the State of Maharashtra. The court examined the reasons for the delay as presented by the applicant's counsel, M. L. Dharashive, and the objections …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusKAUSHALYA RAGHU MULE

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the compensation awarded to claimants whose lands in Salegaon village were acquired for the rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons. The claimants sought parity with other similarly situated claimants who had been awarded Rs.20 per square foot in …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusKAUSHALYA RAGHU MULE

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed the compensation awarded for lands acquired in Salegaon village for the rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons, while the claimants filed cross‑objections seeking the same enhanced rate granted to similarly situated claimants in other appeals. The original …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusSHRIMANT MADHAV BABAR

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed the award of compensation in five land‑acquisition cases concerning lands in Salegaon village that were acquired for the rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons. The claimants argued that, in earlier judgments involving similar lands, the compensation had been …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusSHRIMANT MADHAV BABAR

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the compensation awarded to claimants whose lands in Salegaon village were acquired for the rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons. The original award was Rs 15,500‑20,000 per hectare, which the Reference Court enhanced to Rs 96,400 per hectare. The …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusMADHUKAR KASHINATH BABAR

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed the award of compensation in five land‑acquisition cases concerning lands in Salegaon village, acquired for rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons. The claimants argued that, in similar acquisitions for the same project, the Court had enhanced compensation to …

SHAHIDAS TRIMBAK MHASKEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellant, Shahidas Trimbak Mhask, filed a First Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking higher compensation for his acquired land used for the Nimna Dudhna Project. He argued that, based on a recent decision in a similar appeal, he should receive the enhanced rates for …

YUVRAJ YASHWANT MASKEversusVAN PARIKSHETRA ADHIKARI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, a self‑described forest guard since 2000, filed a complaint alleging that he was a daily‑wager denied permanency and benefits despite working over 240 days a year, and that his wages were withheld. The respondents contended that no such post existed, the identity card was …

JANARDHAN SIDRAM MISALversusVAN PARIKSHETRA ADHIKARI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, a self‑described forest guard, filed a complaint alleging that he had worked continuously for more than 240 days each year for ten years and therefore was entitled to permanency and related benefits under a 1996 Government Resolution. The respondents contended that no such post …

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION PROJECT STRENGTHENING DIV. OMERGA, OSMANABAD AND OTHERSversusPRALAHAD NAGAPPA BANDPATTE DIED THR, LRS. VATSALABAI PRALHAD BANDPATTE AND OTHERS

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Project Strengthening Division, Omerga and others (the acquiring body) filed an application seeking a stay of the judgment and award dated 20 March 2018 passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad in L.A.R. No. 201 of 2012. The award related to …

NOORJAHA BEGUM SARFARAJ QURESHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, an informant in Crime No.231/2022, filed a criminal writ petition seeking directions for the State to forward the charge‑sheet to the trial court and to have the court take cognizance of offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504 r/w Sec. 34 IPC, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim …

DNYANOBA BHIMRAO PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellant, Dnyanoba Pawar, appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking a higher compensation for 1 hectare 21 ares of land acquired for earthquake rehabilitation. The original market value was set at Rs 175 per are, later increased to Rs 5,000 per are by the Reference …

MANIK MACHINDRA GHOLVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Manik Machindra Gholve, filed an application seeking condonation of a 2,957‑day delay in filing a first appeal against the State of Maharashtra. The High Court noted that the respondent State’s advocate was present, but the acquiring body (Respondent No.2) was not. The court examined …

SAHEBRAO KISHANRAO MOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, heirs of the deceased landowner, appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation for 0.6 hectares acquired for a 33 kV sub‑station. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had initially awarded Rs 49 per square metre, which the reference court …

CHAVALIBAI MULCHAND RATHODversusTHE COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS

DISMISSED

The appellant, Chavalibai Mulchand Rathod, appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation for fruit‑bearing trees on land acquired for the Minor Irrigation Tank Londhari Project. The reference court had determined compensation for the land but rejected the …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusNAMDEV BALIRAM RANKHAMB

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The State of Maharashtra filed an application seeking condonation of a 1,966‑day delay in filing a first appeal against an award rendered by a learned Reference Court. The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, heard arguments from both parties. The court examined the reasons for the delay as set …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusBHAURAO BALI RANKHAMB

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The State of Maharashtra filed an application seeking condonation of a 1,966‑day delay in filing a first appeal against an award rendered by a learned Reference Court. The primary issue before the court was whether such a lengthy delay could be condoned under the principles of natural justice and …

ABED S/O. KASAM PATHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Abed S/o. Kasam Pathan and others, filed a criminal application and subsequently sought leave to amend it after the investigating agency filed a charge-sheet. The learned advocate for the applicants requested the court's permission to make the amendment. The principal issue before …

YASHWANT KISAN GAWALI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Withdrawn

The applicants, who are the father‑in‑law, mother‑in‑law, brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law of the informant, filed an application seeking quash of FIR No.112/15 and the charge sheet RCC No.1093/2015 relating to offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 …

DINKAR S/O. NIVRUTTIRAO GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Dinkar S/o. Nivruttirao Gaikwad, filed a criminal application (No. 3703 of 2019) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the proceedings, the applicant's counsel informed the court that the applicant had died, rendering the application infructuous. The State of …

PRITAM MOHAN RATHOD AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash FIR No.0328/2024, which alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, based on a complaint by the wife of Applicant No.1. The FIR accused the husband of harassment and …

AMOL MADHUKAR CHAUDHARI AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The petitioners, Amol Madhukar Chaudhari and others, filed a criminal writ petition in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. Their counsel informed the court that the matter had become infructuous and they wished to withdraw the petition. The State's counsel was present. The court, upon receiving …