SIDDHESHWAR SHIKSHAN MANDAL THRU TRUSTEES AND ORS vs SATISH THORAT AND ORS — HCBM10142432026
Case under Bombay Public Trust Act. Status: For Orders (Objection Not Removed). Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM010142432026
Filing Number
WP/8230/2026
Filing Date
23-Mar-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
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SIDDHESHWAR SHIKSHAN MANDAL THRU TRUSTEES AND ORS
Adv. P B GUJAR
-
2.BALBHIM RAMCHANDRA SHITOLE
-
3.DHYANDEO DAGADU SHINDE
-
4.SHANKAR MARUTI SHELAR
-
5.SAMPAT BABURAO SHITOLE
-
6.BABURAO TUKARAM KAPRE
-
7.RAJENDRA MADHAVRAO SHINDE
-
8.MOHAN SARJERAO THORAT
-
9.SANTOSH CHANDRAKANT KADAM
-
10.PRASANNA RAMESH KAPRE
-
11.RAJESH BAPURAO NATU
-
12.GOVIND BABURAO SHENDGE
-
13.NANDKUMAR MANIK VISHWASE
Respondent(s)
-
1.SATISH THORAT AND ORS
-
2.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO OFFICE OF THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER
-
3.ASSISTANT CHARITY COMMISSIONER-4,PUNE DIVISION, PUNE
Case History
-
08-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
08-Jun-2026
Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)View PDF
Case Summary: In Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8230 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, the petitioners failed to remove office objections after notification on 23rd/24th April 2026. Rather than straightaway refusing registration as per Rule 3 sub-rule (iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, the Registrar (Judicial-I) granted the petitioners and their advocate an additional two weeks to cure the defects. If office objections remain unremoved within this period, the petition will face refusal of registration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Apr-2026
Objections To Be Removed
Assistant Registrar
-
23-Mar-2026
Case filed
Case Summary: In Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8230 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, the petitioners failed to remove office objections after notification on 23rd/24th April 2026. Rather than straightaway refusing registration as per Rule 3 sub-rule (iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, the Registrar (Judicial-I) granted the petitioners and their advocate an additional two weeks to cure the defects. If office objections remain unremoved within this period, the petition will face refusal of registration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts