MIRABAI GANESH MHATRE AND ANR THROU. HER POA DINESHKUMAR KESHARWANI vs MAHARASHTRA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — WP/14600/2025

Case under Industrial Development Act (Maharashtra). Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM010399122025

Next Hearing

16th June 2026

Filing Number

WP/25365/2025

Filing Date

23-07-2025

Registration No

WP/14600/2025

Registration Date

28-10-2025

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN SHAMRAO VENEGAVKAR

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN SHAMRAO VENEGAVKAR

Bench Type

Division

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Acts & Sections

Industrial Development Act (Maharashtra)

Petitioner(s)

MIRABAI GANESH MHATRE AND ANR THROU. HER POA DINESHKUMAR KESHARWANI

Adv. VINOD P SANGVIKAR

TUKARAM GOVIND MADHAVI

Respondent(s)

MAHARASHTRA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN SHAMRAO VENEGAVKAR

05-08-2025

OBJECTIONS TO BE REMOVED

18-11-2025

FRESH ADMISSION

16-06-2026

DUE ADMISSION - 1

08-05-2026

DUE ADMISSION - 1

02-04-2026

DUE ADMISSION - 1

Orders

08-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN SHAMRAO VENEGAVKAR

Case Summary: WP/14600/2025 The petition was adjourned to 16/06/2026. Petitioners complained that after depositing the full purchase price for a land plot with MIDC, the respondent received the money but refused to execute an agreement or allot the plot. The court directed MIDC to verify its records during the interim period and, if the petitioners' claim is sustainable, to execute the agreement and allot the plot accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/14600/2025 The petition was adjourned to 16/06/2026. Petitioners complained that after depositing the full purchase price for a land plot with MIDC, the respondent received the money but refused to execute an agreement or allot the plot. The court directed MIDC to verify its records during the interim period and, if the petitioners' claim is sustainable, to execute the agreement and allot the plot accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case