CHINDHU LAXMAN WAGH AND ORS vs ANANDA KONDAJI WAGH AND ORS — HCBM10144622026

Case under Mamlatdars Courts Act 1906. Status: For Orders (Objection Not Removed). Next hearing: 08th June 2026.

For Orders (Objection Not Removed) Next hearing 08-Jun-2026 this date has passed

CNR: HCBM010144622026

Filing Number

WP/8350/2026

Filing Date

24-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

Orders passed by Quasi Judicial Authority Other than Labour and Industrial Court ( 105 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Mamlatdars Courts Act 1906

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHINDHU LAXMAN WAGH AND ORS

    Adv. Rahul Damodar Motkari

  2. 2.KACHRU NIVRUTI WAGH

  3. 3.BHAUSAHEB NIVRUTI WAGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ANANDA KONDAJI WAGH AND ORS

  2. 2.THE TAHSILDAR, SINNAR

  3. 3.THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR ALIAS SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER

Case History

  1. 08-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-Jun-2026

    Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)View PDF

    Case Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8350 of 2026 was adjourned. The petitioners and their advocate failed to remove office objections by the April 23-24, 2026 deadline. Rather than outright refusing registration, the Registrar granted a two-week extension to cure the deficiencies; failure to comply will result in rejection of the petition under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII, Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Apr-2026

    Objections To Be Removed

    Assistant Registrar

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8350 of 2026 was adjourned. The petitioners and their advocate failed to remove office objections by the April 23-24, 2026 deadline. Rather than outright refusing registration, the Registrar granted a two-week extension to cure the deficiencies; failure to comply will result in rejection of the petition under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII, Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case