VIVEK BONAVENTURE RODRIGUES vs MICHAEL RODRIGUES AND ANR — HCBM10146192026

Case under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Sr. Citizen Act. 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: HCBM010146192026

Filing Number

WP/8455/2026

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

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Sr. Citizen Act

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VIVEK BONAVENTURE RODRIGUES

    Adv. MISHRA RAJENDRA PRASAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MICHAEL RODRIGUES AND ANR

  2. 2.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR

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 No. 8455 of 2026 was adjourned with a final opportunity granted. The petitioner and advocate failed to remove office objections within the initial notification period (23rd/24th April 2026). The Registrar (Judicial-I) granted two weeks additional time to cure the defects, warning that failure to do so will result in refusal of registration 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.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    Objections To Be Removed

    Assistant Registrar

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Writ Petition No. 8455 of 2026 was adjourned with a final opportunity granted. The petitioner and advocate failed to remove office objections within the initial notification period (23rd/24th April 2026). The Registrar (Judicial-I) granted two weeks additional time to cure the defects, warning that failure to do so will result in refusal of registration 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.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case