PRAJWAL PRAKASH MHATRE vs SHITAL PRAJWAL MHATRE — IA/3279/2026
Case under Family Court Act Section 19. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010212932026
Filing Number
IA/12409/2026
Filing Date
24-Apr-2026
Registration No
IA/3279/2026
Registration Date
27-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre , Hon'ble Justice Smt Manjusha Ajay Deshpande
Coram
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre , Hon'ble Justice Smt Manjusha Ajay Deshpande
Bench Type
Single
Category
FAMILY LAW ( 16 )
Sub-Category
DIVORCE/DISSOLUTION ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PRAJWAL PRAKASH MHATRE
Adv. Vikrant Khare
Respondent(s)
-
1.SHITAL PRAJWAL MHATRE
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
28-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shyam C. Chandak,hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak ShirsatView PDF
Case Summary: IA/3279/2026 The High Court of Bombay rejected the father's (Prajwal Prakash Mhatre) interim application seeking custody of the child during school vacation, finding his conduct contemptuous and harassing. The court noted the father's inconsistent stance—initially offering to pay maintenance arrears but later claiming inability to pay (₹2.49-4.69 lakhs)—and expressed doubts about his capacity to maintain the child given his poor financial condition. The matter was adjourned to 9th June 2026 for the regular court's consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre,hon'ble Justice Smt Manjusha Ajay DeshpandeView PDF
-
06-May-2026
For Circulation
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre , Hon'ble Justice Smt Manjusha Ajay Deshpande
-
30-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre,hon'ble Justice Smt Manjusha Ajay DeshpandeView PDF
-
30-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. IA/3279/2026
Case Summary: IA/3279/2026 The High Court of Bombay rejected the father's (Prajwal Prakash Mhatre) interim application seeking custody of the child during school vacation, finding his conduct contemptuous and harassing. The court noted the father's inconsistent stance—initially offering to pay maintenance arrears but later claiming inability to pay (₹2.49-4.69 lakhs)—and expressed doubts about his capacity to maintain the child given his poor financial condition. The matter was adjourned to 9th June 2026 for the regular court's consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts