SHRI. DEEPAK VINAYAK KAMAT vs SMT. RAJASHRI SADASHIV REGE NEE RAJASHRI VINAYAK KAMAT AND OTHERS — AO/557/2026
Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section 104. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010234272026
Filing Number
AO/13697/2026
Filing Date
05-05-2026
Registration No
AO/557/2026
Registration Date
08-06-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Bench Type
Single
Category
CIVIL APPEALS ( 45 )
Sub-Category
Single Bench Matters ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHRI. DEEPAK VINAYAK KAMAT
Adv. Rupesh R Lanjekar
Respondent(s)
SMT. RAJASHRI SADASHIV REGE NEE RAJASHRI VINAYAK KAMAT AND OTHERS
ASHOK VINAYAK KAMAT
BHARATIYA KALA MANDAL CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY THR THE SECRETARY
M/S KEYSTONE REALTORS LTD RUSTOMJEE GROUP
Orders
Case Summary: AO/557/2026 The Bombay High Court partially allowed Deepak Vinayak Kamat's appeal against a trial court's interim order in a property dispute involving a residential flat. The court found that Kamat demonstrated a prima facie right to reside in the flat during his lifetime based on his mother's will, despite the flat being ultimately bequeathed to his sister (Defendant No.1). The High Court deleted the trial court's rejection of interim relief and remitted the matter back to the trial court to comprehensively consider all issues raised by both parties—including questions of inheritance rights, party relationships, and the flat's occupation—and pass a reasoned final order after completion of pleadings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: AO/557/2026 The Bombay High Court partially allowed Deepak Vinayak Kamat's appeal against a trial court's interim order in a property dispute involving a residential flat. The court found that Kamat demonstrated a prima facie right to reside in the flat during his lifetime based on his mother's will, despite the flat being ultimately bequeathed to his sister (Defendant No.1). The High Court deleted the trial court's rejection of interim relief and remitted the matter back to the trial court to comprehensively consider all issues raised by both parties—including questions of inheritance rights, party relationships, and the flat's occupation—and pass a reasoned final order after completion of pleadings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts