YOGESH VISHWANATH WALKER vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI — HCBM10130762026
Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order). Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM010130762026
Filing Number
WP/7566/2026
Filing Date
16-Mar-2026
Judge
Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)
Coram
Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)
Bench Type
Single
Category
ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )
Sub-Category
ORDINARY CIVIL ( 11 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.YOGESH VISHWANATH WALKER
Adv. Samir
-
2.VICTOR KOJMA FERNANDES
-
3.MAHESH RAM MORE
-
4.ALAMELU DHARMENDRA PRASAD GOUND
-
5.AARTI SONU GORVE
-
6.PRIYANKA SUNIL JADHAV
-
7.SHALINI PRASHANT WANKHEDE
-
8.SHEELA RAJESH PAL
-
9.DATTATRAY PANDURANG KARANDE
Respondent(s)
-
1.MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI
Case History
-
16-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
16-Jun-2026
For Orders (Objection Not Removed)
Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)
-
05-May-2026
Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)View PDF
Case Summary Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 7566 of 2026 — Bombay High Court The writ petition filed by Yogesh Vishwanath Walker, Victor Kojma Fernandes, and Mahesh Ram More against the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai was notified on April 17, 2026 for removal of office objections. The petitioners and their advocate failed to remove these objections by the deadline. Rather than immediately refusing registration under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Rules, 1960, the Registrar granted a second opportunity. Two weeks (excluding Summer Vacation) have been granted to cure the defects; failure to do so will result in refusal of registration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Mar-2026
Case filed
Case Summary Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 7566 of 2026 — Bombay High Court The writ petition filed by Yogesh Vishwanath Walker, Victor Kojma Fernandes, and Mahesh Ram More against the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai was notified on April 17, 2026 for removal of office objections. The petitioners and their advocate failed to remove these objections by the deadline. Rather than immediately refusing registration under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Rules, 1960, the Registrar granted a second opportunity. Two weeks (excluding Summer Vacation) have been granted to cure the defects; failure to do so will result in refusal of registration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts