BHARAT MULJI KHONA vs M/S FIZA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY THROU. G.R. MUJAWAR AND ORS Advocate - Siddhesh Pilankar — WP/2457/2026

Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 17th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010082912026

Filing Number

WP/4737/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

WP/2457/2026

Registration Date

18-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

17-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHARAT MULJI KHONA

    Adv. M Tripathi and Co

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M/S FIZA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY THROU. G.R. MUJAWAR AND ORS Advocate - Siddhesh Pilankar

  2. 2.AKKABAI SHANTARAM PATIL

  3. 3.PARVATI GANA PATIL

  4. 4.BHAGWAN KRISHNA BHAGAT

  5. 5.PARSHURAM KRISHNA BHAGAT

  6. 6.PRABHAKAR KRISHNA BHAGAT

  7. 7.SHEVANTIBAI ASHOK BHAGAT

  8. 8.SPECIAL LAND AND ACQUISITION OFFICER

  9. 9.TOWN PLANNING OFFICER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

    Case Summary: WP 2457/2026 Bharat Mulji Khona v. M/s Fiza Construction Company and Others The Bombay High Court partly allowed three consolidated writ petitions challenging procedural orders in a property dispute. The court quashed the trial judge's order allowing production of affidavits from a separate heirship proceeding as evidence, holding affidavits cannot constitute evidence without satisfying Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act. The court also required the trial judge to frame and decide the limitation issue, noting courts have a duty to examine bar of limitation under Section 3 of the Limitation Act regardless of defendant pleadings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

  5. 30-Mar-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

  7. 12-Mar-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

  9. 24-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/2457/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 2457/2026 Bharat Mulji Khona v. M/s Fiza Construction Company and Others The Bombay High Court partly allowed three consolidated writ petitions challenging procedural orders in a property dispute. The court quashed the trial judge's order allowing production of affidavits from a separate heirship proceeding as evidence, holding affidavits cannot constitute evidence without satisfying Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act. The court also required the trial judge to frame and decide the limitation issue, noting courts have a duty to examine bar of limitation under Section 3 of the Limitation Act regardless of defendant pleadings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case