VIVEK MANOHAR HALDANKAR AND ORS vs SMITA RAVINDRAKUMAR POWLE AND ORS — IA/438/2026
Case under Mah. Land Revenue Code, 1966 Section 227. Next hearing: 24th March 2026.
CNR: HCBM010621232025
Next Hearing
24th March 2026
Filing Number
IA/38275/2025
Filing Date
01-12-2025
Registration No
IA/438/2026
Registration Date
17-01-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Bench Type
Single
Category
ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )
Sub-Category
OTHERS ( 99 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VIVEK MANOHAR HALDANKAR AND ORS
Adv. SWAPNIL NEWASKAR
Respondent(s)
SMITA RAVINDRAKUMAR POWLE AND ORS
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
FOR ADMISSION
FOR ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
| 09-02-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
Orders
Case Summary: IA/438/2026 Case: Interim Application No. 438 of 2026 in Writ Petition No. 2056 of 2025 Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) Parties: Smita Ravindrakumar Powle and Another (Petitioners) v. Vivek Manohar Haldankar and Others (Respondents) Order (9 June 2026): The case was adjourned sine die (indefinitely) pending the full bench decision in *Ravindra Laxman Borole v. State of Maharashtra* (WP 2103/2021), as the issues in both cases are identical. The court granted time for respondents' advocate to file his vakalatnama and permitted mentioning the matter after the full bench decision. Any interim relief previously granted continues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: IA/438/2026 Case: Interim Application No. 438 of 2026 in Writ Petition No. 2056 of 2025 Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) Parties: Smita Ravindrakumar Powle and Another (Petitioners) v. Vivek Manohar Haldankar and Others (Respondents) Order (9 June 2026): The case was adjourned sine die (indefinitely) pending the full bench decision in *Ravindra Laxman Borole v. State of Maharashtra* (WP 2103/2021), as the issues in both cases are identical. The court granted time for respondents' advocate to file his vakalatnama and permitted mentioning the matter after the full bench decision. Any interim relief previously granted continues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts