MRS. UMA SHAILESH HATLE vs THE DESIGNATED OFFICER, WARD F/SOUTH — IA/2679/2026
Case under C.p.c.- (interlocutory Order) Section 104. Next hearing: 23rd September 2026.
CNR: HCBM010091112026
Next Hearing
23rd September 2026
Filing Number
IA/5192/2026
Filing Date
21-02-2026
Registration No
IA/2679/2026
Registration Date
06-04-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Bench Type
Single
Category
CIVIL APPEALS ( 45 )
Sub-Category
Single Bench Matters ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MRS. UMA SHAILESH HATLE
Adv. Kranti S S Anand
MR. SHAILESH MANNOHAR HATLE
Respondent(s)
THE DESIGNATED OFFICER, WARD F/SOUTH
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
FOR ADMISSION
FOR ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-09-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
| 07-05-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
Orders
Case Summary: IA/2679/2026 The Bombay High Court granted a stay of the Municipal Corporation's demolition order against a wooden safety door installed by tenant-appellants at their residence in Peru Chawl, Mumbai. The court found prima facie that the door (existing since 1977) served legitimate safety purposes for the family with two young daughters and noted the action was initiated due to neighbor complaints rather than Corporation oversight. The appeal is scheduled for hearing on 18 June 2026, with the Corporation directed to file its reply within four weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: IA/2679/2026 The Bombay High Court granted a stay of the Municipal Corporation's demolition order against a wooden safety door installed by tenant-appellants at their residence in Peru Chawl, Mumbai. The court found prima facie that the door (existing since 1977) served legitimate safety purposes for the family with two young daughters and noted the action was initiated due to neighbor complaints rather than Corporation oversight. The appeal is scheduled for hearing on 18 June 2026, with the Corporation directed to file its reply within four weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts