JANAKI SALIAN AND OTHERS vs GOPAL KRISHNAPPA SHRIYAN AND OTHERS — HCBM10239622026
Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section 104. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM010239622026
Next Hearing
12th June 2026
Filing Number
AO/14056/2026
Filing Date
07-05-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
Bench Type
Single
Category
CIVIL APPEALS ( 45 )
Sub-Category
Single Bench Matters ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JANAKI SALIAN AND OTHERS
Adv. Kevin Gala
RAJESHWARI VELONDE DAUGHTER OF DECEASED VAIJANTHI PANDU KUNDAR
TEJASWINI KOTIAN DAUGHTER OF DECEASED VAIJANTHI PANDU KUNDAR
VISHWAS SHRIYAN GUPTA DAUGHTER OF DECEASED ANUSAYA DINESH GUPTA
JAYALAKSHMI KRISHNAPPA SHRIYAN
Respondent(s)
GOPAL KRISHNAPPA SHRIYAN AND OTHERS
REKHA NANDU BANGERA
SWATI GUPTA DAUGHTER OF DECEASED ANUSAYA DINESH GUPTA
SHIBA SHETTY DAUGHTER OF DECEASED ANUSAYA DINESH GUPTA
DEEPA GUPTA DAUGHTER OF DECEASED ANUSAYA DINESH GUPTA
THE SIDDHARTH NAGAR C OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD
MAHARASHTRA HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY MHADA
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
FOR ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-06-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
Orders
Case Summary The High Court of Bombay adjourned the appeal to June 12, 2026. The court issued notice to respondents and directed them to file an Affidavit-in-Reply within three weeks. The appellants (claiming settled possession of redeveloped MHADA property since 2007) are permitted to serve the appeal notice on respondents. The court noted it requires fuller hearing of all interested parties before deciding on the restraint on handing over the redeveloped tenement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The High Court of Bombay adjourned the appeal to June 12, 2026. The court issued notice to respondents and directed them to file an Affidavit-in-Reply within three weeks. The appellants (claiming settled possession of redeveloped MHADA property since 2007) are permitted to serve the appeal notice on respondents. The court noted it requires fuller hearing of all interested parties before deciding on the restraint on handing over the redeveloped tenement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts