SIDDHESHWAR SHIKSHAN MANDAL PIMPALGAON THRU TRUSTEES AND ORS vs SATISH THORAT ANR ORS — HCBM10142382026

Case under Bombay Public Trust Act. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM010142382026

Next Hearing

08th June 2026

Filing Number

WP/8227/2026

Filing Date

23-03-2026

Judge

Shri. P. P. JADHAV, Registrar(Judl I)

Coram

Shri. P. P. JADHAV, Registrar(Judl I)

Bench Type

Single

Category

RELIGIOUS/CHARITABLE ENDOWMWNTS AND PUBLIC TRUST ( 33 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Acts & Sections

Bombay Public Trust Act

Petitioner(s)

SIDDHESHWAR SHIKSHAN MANDAL PIMPALGAON THRU TRUSTEES AND ORS

Adv. P B GUJAR

BALBHIM RAMCHANDRA SHITOLE

DHYANDEO DAGADU SHINDE

SHANKAR MARUTI SHELAR

SAMPAT BABURAO SHITOLE

BABURAO TUKARAM KAPRE

RAJENDRA MADHAVRAO SHINDE

MOHAN SARJERAO THORAT

SANTOSH CHANDRAKANT KADAM

PRASANNA RAMESH KAPRE

RAJESH BAPURAO NATU

GOVIND BABURAO SHENDGE

NANDKUMAR MANIK VISHWASE

Respondent(s)

SATISH THORAT ANR ORS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO OFFICE OF THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER

ASSISTANT CHARITY COMMISSIONER-4,PUNE DIVISION, PUNE

Hearing History

Judge: Shri. P. P. JADHAV, Registrar(Judl I)

23-04-2026

OBJECTIONS TO BE REMOVED

Orders

08-06-2026
Shri. P. P. JADHAV, Registrar(Judl I)

Case Summary In Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8227 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, the petitioners failed to remove office objections within the prescribed timeframe after notification on 23rd/24th April 2026. Rather than immediately refusing registration, the Registrar (Judicial-I) granted petitioners and their advocate a two-week extension to cure the defects. If objections remain unremoved after this period, the petition will be rejected under Rule 3 sub-rule (iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary In Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8227 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, the petitioners failed to remove office objections within the prescribed timeframe after notification on 23rd/24th April 2026. Rather than immediately refusing registration, the Registrar (Judicial-I) granted petitioners and their advocate a two-week extension to cure the defects. If objections remain unremoved after this period, the petition will be rejected under Rule 3 sub-rule (iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case