Ahmednagar District Court: 38 Judges, 104,980 Cases Audited

# Ahmednagar District Court: 38 Judges, 104,980 Cases Audited This report is produced by Judge My Lawyer, India's legal analytics platform, based on an analysis of 104,980 cases filed before the District and Sessions Court, Ahmednagar. Case-level data was sourced directly from the court's publicly accessible case management portal. The analysis covers 38 adjudicators across proceedings spanning January 1999 to April 2026.

The Two-Speed Court

Ahmednagar District Court runs on two very different clocks. The first is the Principal District Judge's arbitration docket, where 20,980 land acquisition references were disposed at an average of 48 days each — a bulk processing operation that drives the court's headline 86.0% disposal rate and pulls the court-wide average resolution time down to 463 days. The second clock governs everything else: contested civil and criminal litigation where 14,682 cases remain pending as of April 2026, 5,214 of them filed more than three years ago and 2,967 filed more than five years ago. For the litigant whose Motor Accident Claim, criminal appeal, or land reference has been sitting before a numbered District Judge bench since 2020 or earlier, 463 days is not their reality. The weighted average wait across the seven most heavily loaded active benches is 1,086 days — nearly three years. ---

The Full Scorecard: All Active Adjudicators

Court-wide baseline: **104,980 total cases | 86.0% disposal rate | 463 days average resolution (disposed) | 58.7% petitioner win rate on contested decisions | 41.3% respondent win rate** *Petitioner win rates exclude settled matters. Win rates for small-volume or bail-application-dominant benches reflect caseload composition, not comparative judicial tendency.* The scorecard reveals a court with 11 active benches carrying substantial pending loads and 17 closed or near-closed benches with fully settled historical dockets. The disposal rate headline is inflated by the Principal District Judge's 20,980 fast-track arbitration references. Remove those from the count and the court's contested civil and criminal disposal rate drops considerably. The seven numbered District Judge benches active today — DJ-1 through DJ-7 — carry a combined 9,665 pending cases. Their disposal rates range from 74.9% (DJ-7) to 80.6% (DJ-6), and their average resolutions on disposed matters range from 537 days (DJ-4) to 705 days (DJ-6). Not one of these benches reaches a 463-day average when the arbitration shortcut is removed from the calculation. The three Adhoc benches — designated adjunct benches to handle overflow — tell a different story. Adhoc DJ-2 has the lowest active disposal rate in the court at 62.2%, meaning more than one in three cases filed before it remains unresolved. Adhoc DJ-3 takes the longest on the cases it does finish: 1,040 days on average, more than twice the court headline and 124% above the 463-day benchmark. These are not peripheral benches — they collectively carry 10,405 cases. ---

The Backlog Crisis

**The aggregate numbers are stark.** Across these eleven active benches, 5,214 cases have been pending for more than three years. 2,967 have been pending for more than five years. Every one of those figures represents an actual litigant — a motor accident victim waiting for compensation, a family in a land dispute, a criminal appellant whose future is unresolved. District Judge-1's docket is the most alarming by age distribution: 712 of its 1,465 pending cases have passed the three-year mark, and 471 have been waiting more than five years. The average pending case before District Judge-1 is already 1,291 days old — 3.5 years. District Judge 5 reports the highest average pending age among the numbered benches at 1,321 days, with 703 cases beyond the three-year threshold. Adhoc District Judge-2 carries 428 cases older than five years — the highest five-year count of any active bench. The Principal District Judge's 1,495 pending cases look more manageable by comparison: average age 573 days, only 110 beyond five years. But this bench's pending load consists largely of non-arbitration matters — civil miscellaneous appeals, criminal revision applications, motor accident claims — that require substantive adjudication, not reference determination. ---

Judge-by-Judge: The Full Profile

The Principal District And Sessions Judge — 27,995 Cases | 1999–2026

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** The Principal District And Sessions Judge's record is dominated by 20,980 Arbitration R.D. matters — land acquisition references under the Land Acquisition Act — every one of which was disposed at an average of 48 days. These are reference-determination proceedings, formulaic in nature, and their bulk closure is what gives this bench a 94.7% disposal rate and a 193-day average that has no parallel elsewhere in the court. Remove them, and the remaining 7,015 cases have a very different profile. The most significant non-arbitration workload is Motor Accident Claims Petitions: 981 filed, 911 disposed, but at an average of 1,525 days — more than four years per resolved MACP. That 92.9% MACP disposal rate sounds strong until the duration is considered. The 217 pending cases older than three years before this bench are primarily MACP and civil miscellaneous matters where the non-arbitration clock governs. Top petitioner-side appearances belong to Mundada S. B. (3,115 cases), Torne V. D. (1,824 cases), Padir S. G. (1,253 cases), and Khare R. B. (1,233 cases) — high-volume arbitration-heavy practices. The 50.9% petitioner win rate reflects the balanced nature of contested civil and criminal outcomes where outcome records exist. ---

District Judge 4 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 8,104 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** District Judge 4 carries the heaviest active pending load in the court: 1,746 cases, 521 of which have passed the three-year mark and 290 beyond five years. Of its 2,293 bail applications, 91.3% are disposed — these are largely administrative proceedings processed quickly at 24 days average. The contested matters tell a different story. Sessions cases have a 57.4% disposal rate, meaning 278 of 653 criminal sessions matters remain unresolved, averaging 860 days when they do conclude. Motor Accident Claims show 74.0% disposal at 1,201 days average — 3.3 years per claim. **Top petitioner lawyers:** Nagarkar S. S. (208 petitioner appearances, 0 wins) and Lagad S. A. (198 appearances, 0 wins) represent the extremes of the volume-without-outcome pattern before this bench. The zero win rates are partly explained by the caseload profile — lawyers who appear predominantly in bail applications, where the "petitioner" win rate tracks denials rather than contested civil victories — but the pattern repeats across multiple benches and warrants attention from clients who review court records before retaining counsel. ---

District Judge 2 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 7,159 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** District Judge 2 carries the second-highest pending load at 1,700 cases, with 427 beyond five years — the second-highest five-year count of any active bench. Reference Court Appeals (land acquisition references) at this bench show a 46.2% disposal rate and a 1,760-day average — almost five years to resolution when resolved. Criminal appeals are disposed at only 39.0% — 448 of 735 criminal appeals remain pending. The 62.9% petitioner win rate on contested decisions is the highest among the active numbered DJ benches. **Top petitioner lawyers:** Nagarkar Joshi S. appears 112 times as petitioner counsel before District Judge 2 and records zero wins on contested decisions. The same lawyer posts near-zero wins across multiple benches — 142 appearances before DJ-3, 93 before Adhoc DJ-1, 96 before Adhoc DJ-3, and 98 before District Judge-1. Across all appearances where outcomes are recorded, petitioner wins attributed to this lawyer are consistently at or near zero. The volumes are large enough that this constitutes a meaningful signal for litigants reviewing court records before engaging counsel. ---

District Judge 3 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 6,942 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** District Judge 3 carries the highest MACP volume of any single active bench: 1,087 Motor Accident Claims Petitions, 79.4% disposed, at an average of 988 days — 2.7 years per resolved motor accident claim. Criminal appeals at this bench run at only 40.1% disposal, with resolved cases averaging 1,538 days. Reference Court Appeals also average 1,538 days when resolved — identical to criminal appeals, suggesting both categories move through this docket at the same rate. **Top petitioner lawyers:** ---

The District Judge-1 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 6,323 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** **The DJ-1 Concern:** This bench carries 712 cases pending beyond three years and 471 beyond five years — the highest five-year pending count on the entire court. The average pending case before the District Judge-1 bench has already waited 1,291 days. Reference Court Appeals here show the most alarming duration in the court: 2,009 days average for the 46.5% that do get resolved — 5.5 years per land acquisition appeal decided. Of 391 RCA matters before this bench, 209 remain pending. **Top petitioner lawyers:** ---

District Judge 5 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 5,761 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** District Judge 5 has the highest average pending age of any active numbered bench: 1,321 days, or 3.6 years. Its Sessions Cases have the lowest disposal rate among the DJ-5 case types at 38.6% — meaning 341 of 555 criminal sessions matters remain unresolved. Motor Accident Claims run at 71.1% disposal, 1,275 days average. Reference Court Appeals average 1,452 days when resolved. **Top petitioner lawyers:** ---

District Judge 6 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 3,985 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (top 5):** **The Spl. Case Stall:** Of 711 Special Cases filed before District Judge 6, only 160 — 22.5% — have been disposed. This is the most acute disposal failure for any significant case category on this bench and one of the lowest disposal rates for any substantial case type across the court. The 551 pending Special Cases before DJ-6 represent the largest single-category accumulation in an otherwise relatively better-performing docket. The bench's 64.1% petitioner win rate on contested decisions is the highest among active numbered benches. Its Motor Accident Claims record is the best in the court on closure: 402 MACP matters, 98.8% disposed, at 1,339 days average — 3.7 years per claim. ---

Adhoc District Judge-1 And ASJ — 3,729 Cases

**At a glance:** This bench handles a mixed civil-criminal docket with the court's highest settlement rate among active benches: 20.7% of disposed matters settled, against a court average of 6.8% for disposed cases overall. The 45.1% petitioner win rate on contested decisions is the lowest among active benches, reflecting a caseload dominated by Motor Accident Claims Petitions (871 total, 47.8% disposed, 1,220 days average). The top petitioner lawyers before this bench are the Assistant Government Pleader (244 appearances, 86.2% win rate), Lagad S. A. (113 appearances, 16.7% win rate), and Nagarkar Joshi S. (93 appearances, 33.3% win rate). The bench also carries 318 Arbitration R.D. matters averaging 1,504 days on resolution — the longest land acquisition arbitration average of any bench in this court. ---

District Judge 7 And Addl. Sessions Judge — 3,574 Cases

District Judge 7 carries 898 pending cases with an average age of 1,290 days — effectively tied with the District Judge-1 bench for the second-highest average pending age. 241 cases have been waiting more than five years. The bench's 65.8% petitioner win rate on contested decisions is the highest of any active numbered bench in the court. Top petitioner lawyers: Assistant Government Pleader (301 appearances, 84.9% wins), Lagad S. A. (200 appearances, 40% wins), Tawale M. B. (97 appearances, 67% wins), Gugale S. S. (68 appearances, 70.8% wins). ---

Adhoc District Judge-2 And ASJ — 3,436 Cases

**At a glance:** Adhoc District Judge-2 has the lowest disposal rate in the court at 62.2% — worse than any numbered or adhoc bench currently active. Of its 337 Special Cases (Spl. Case), only 22 — 6.5% — have been disposed, leaving 315 pending. Its Reference Court Appeals (373 total) are at 30.6% disposal, with resolved cases averaging 1,253 days. The 428 cases older than five years represent the highest five-year pending count of any single active bench. The bench's 1,295-day average age for pending cases means the typical unresolved matter has already waited 3.5 years. **Top petitioner lawyers:** Nagarkar U. R. appears 73 times before Adhoc DJ-2 and wins 95.7% of contested decisions — a striking contrast to Lagad S. A. (197 appearances, 7.7% win rate) and Nagarkar Joshi S. (120 appearances, 0.0% win rate) on the same bench. Court records do not reveal why these outcomes diverge so sharply before the same adjudicator. ---

Adhoc District Judge-3 And ASJ — 3,240 Cases

**At a glance:** **Case type breakdown (key types):** **The Composition Effect:** The 36.8% petitioner win rate — the lowest of any active bench — is explained almost entirely by caseload composition, not by any identifiable directional tendency in outcomes. Reference Court Appeals (land acquisition) produced 100 respondent wins against 22 petitioner wins — the state or acquiring authority wins 82% of these reference matters, consistent with their nature as government-side proceedings. Miscellaneous Civil Applications produced 117 respondent wins against only 4 petitioner wins. Arbitration R.D. matters generated 116 respondent wins and zero petitioner wins. These are structural features of those case types. Sessions Cases show the expected pattern: 106 state wins against 9 defense outcomes. The bench's 1,040-day average for disposed cases — the highest of any active bench — is the more meaningful performance signal: even the cases that do get decided have been in the system for nearly three years. ---

The Respondent Lawyer Duration Effect

*Court average resolution: 463 days* The respondent lawyers at the top of this table manage cases that run four to five times the court-wide average duration. Palod S. B.'s 16 cases average 2,391 days — 5.2 times the court average — with 56.3% still pending. Bhapkar J. B. wins 78.6% of contested decisions across 27 cases averaging 2,075 days. Jarandikar B. M. records 90.9% respondent wins in 16 cases averaging 2,007 days. Gandhi G. D. is the outlier in a different direction: 94 cases, 1,914-day average, but only 8.8% respondent win rate — this lawyer represents respondents in matters the defending side consistently loses, yet those cases still run for over five years before resolution. High duration combined with high respondent win rates is the most significant pattern in this table: cases where the defending party ultimately prevails tend to have substantially longer lifespans than the court average, a pattern that data alone cannot explain. ---

Notable Respondents: State, Corporations, and the Land Acquisition Freeze

The State of Maharashtra (appearing under various name variants) is the respondent in more than 27,000 cases before this court — roughly 26% of the total docket. These proceedings span criminal appeals where the state defends prosecution outcomes, civil revision applications, and land acquisition references where state agencies are the opposing party. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation faces 334 cases, 120 of which remain pending at an average duration of 1,229 days. Ahmednagar Municipal Corporation appears in 247 cases, 98 pending, averaging 1,266 days — with 61 petitioner wins against 57 respondent wins on contested decisions, an unusually even split for a government body respondent. The most structurally stalled category belongs to land acquisition respondents. "Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) and Sub-Divisional Officer" appears in 148 cases — every single one of which remains pending. Zero have been disposed. The average case duration is 366 days and rising. These are reference court proceedings filed by landowners seeking enhanced compensation under land acquisition statutes. "The Competent Authority And Sub-Divisional Officer" appears in another 211 cases, 210 of which remain pending. Together, these two overlapping entries for the CALA machinery account for 359 cases, 358 of which remain pending — the single disposed matter produced a petitioner win. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd faces 93 cases, 50 pending (53.8%), averaging 941 days. Ahmednagar Cantonment Board has 49 cases, 34 pending, averaging 1,107 days. Shri Saint Nagebaba Multistate Co-Operative Urban Credit Society faces 72 cases, 52 still pending at an average of 389 days. ---

What the Data Means

The 86.0% disposal rate is a misleading headline. It exists because 20,980 land acquisition arbitration references were disposed by the Principal District Judge at an average of 48 days each. That bulk administrative process has no bearing on how long a Motor Accident Claim, a criminal appeal, or a contested civil matter takes to resolve. Strip those 20,980 arbitration matters from the count and the picture changes substantially. The court's real performance on contested litigation is measured in its 14,682 pending cases, 5,214 of which are more than three years old. The active numbered District Judge benches operate in a narrow and unremarkable performance band: disposal rates between 74.9% and 80.6%, resolution times on disposed matters between 537 and 705 days. None finishes contested work in under eighteen months on average. The Adhoc benches perform worse on both metrics: disposal rates as low as 62.2% and resolution times as high as 1,040 days. Adhoc DJ-2's 428 cases older than five years and District Judge-1's 471 five-year-plus pending matters are the most stark expressions of a backlog that has been compounding for years. The petitioner win rate of 58.7% court-wide is heavily shaped by caseload composition. The Extra Joint District Judge-1 bench's 89.7% petitioner rate reflects a docket of almost entirely special criminal legislation matters where the state, as petitioner, wins the large majority of trials. Adhoc DJ-3's 36.8% rate reflects land acquisition reference appeals and miscellaneous civil applications where respondent bodies structurally prevail. Neither outlier signals individual adjudicator tendency — both signal case-type assignment patterns. The Nagarkar Joshi S. and Lagad S. A. volume-without-outcome pattern is consistent enough across multiple benches to be practically meaningful. Nagarkar Joshi S. has 0 petitioner wins from 112 appearances before DJ-2, 0 from 120 before Adhoc DJ-2, 2 from 142 before DJ-3, and 4 from 98 before DJ-1. Lagad S. A. averages 0–33% win rates across all active benches despite 100–260 appearances at each. Court records do not explain this pattern. Litigants reviewing counsel options before the District and Sessions Court, Ahmednagar can check these figures in public case records. The land acquisition backlog — 358 entirely pending CALA matters, Reference Court Appeals averaging 1,452 to 2,009 days for the fraction that do get decided, and Arbitration R.D. matters averaging 1,504 days before Adhoc DJ-1 — represents a category of proceedings where the promise of compensation to displaced landowners is measured not in months but in years. The District and Sessions Court, Ahmednagar is the primary appellate forum for these claims in the district. The data shows it is not resolving them quickly. ---

About the Data and Methodology

All 104,980 case records were retrieved from the District and Sessions Court, Ahmednagar's publicly accessible case management portal. Processing through Judge My Lawyer's analytics pipeline involved: adjudicator name consolidation (multiple spelling variants for the same bench mapped to canonical names), duration correction (zero-duration filings excluded from average calculations), outcome standardisation (variants normalised to three categories: petitioner win, respondent win, settled), and status-outcome separation (status and outcome are independent fields in the source system — a case can be marked disposed without a recorded outcome, and 53.2% of disposed cases carry no outcome entry, primarily bail applications, administrative proceedings, and reference determinations). Petitioner win rates throughout exclude settled matters and cases with null outcomes. Bench labelling of "active" versus "closed" is based on whether pending cases remain as of April 2026; it does not reflect formal court administration designations. All figures are subject to the completeness and accuracy of the court's own record-keeping. ---

Disclaimer

The findings in this report are based entirely on publicly available court records and reflect those records as of April 2026. Statistical patterns identified describe empirical regularities in the data as recorded. They do not constitute allegations of bias, partiality, misconduct, or wrongdoing against any adjudicator, advocate, institution, or party. Anomalies noted may reflect administrative recording conventions, interim order documentation practices, data-entry inconsistencies, case-type composition effects, or procedural factors not visible in the public record. This report is published for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.