NEETA HEMANT SOMAN vs JAYSHREE CHANDRAKANT GANDHI — TP/2571/2026

Case under Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 276. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM020090312026

e-Filing Number

10-03-2026

Filing Number

TP/9031/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

TP/2571/2026

Registration Date

08-May-2026

Judge

Mrs. Kavita Y. Ambekar, Company Registrar/Testamentary Registrar

Coram

Mrs. Kavita Y. Ambekar, Company Registrar/Testamentary Registrar

Bench Type

Single

Category

TESTAMENTARY ( 63 )

Sub-Category

Probate ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 276

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NEETA HEMANT SOMAN

    Adv. Rakesh Sakharam Rahate

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.JAYSHREE CHANDRAKANT GANDHI

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    Mrs. Kavita Y. Ambekar, Company Registrar/Testamentary RegistrarView PDF

    Case Summary: TP/2571/2026 On 9th June 2026, the Testamentary Registrar adjourned the petition filed by Neeta Hemant Soman against Jayshree Chandrakant Gandhi for directions. The court ordered the office to issue citations and notice to the Collector, directed the advocate to effect service on non-consenting legal heirs through the Sheriff's office, and instructed verification of any cross-petitions. The matter was kept pending for final hearing after compliance with procedural requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    For Direction

    Mrs. Kavita Y. Ambekar, Company Registrar/Testamentary Registrar

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. TP/2571/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: TP/2571/2026 On 9th June 2026, the Testamentary Registrar adjourned the petition filed by Neeta Hemant Soman against Jayshree Chandrakant Gandhi for directions. The court ordered the office to issue citations and notice to the Collector, directed the advocate to effect service on non-consenting legal heirs through the Sheriff's office, and instructed verification of any cross-petitions. The matter was kept pending for final hearing after compliance with procedural requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case