Paras Khubilal Punamiya vs Khubilal Nathmal Punamiya — TP/2393/2026

Case under Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 372. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM020101202026

e-Filing Number

20-03-2026

Filing Number

TP/10120/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

TP/2393/2026

Registration Date

28-Apr-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

Succession ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 372

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Paras Khubilal Punamiya

    Adv. Prabhu Velar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Khubilal Nathmal Punamiya

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-May-2026

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

    Case TP/2393/2026 Summary: The testamentary petition filed by Paras Khubilal Punamiya was called for direction on 6 May 2026. The court directed the petitioner's advocate to issue notices to non-consenting legal heirs through the Sheriff's office, file an Affidavit of Service, furnish an Administration Bond per Rule 421, and verify any cross-petitions filed. The matter was adjourned with liberty to move for final hearing after all compliance requirements are satisfied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    For Direction

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

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. TP/2393/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case TP/2393/2026 Summary: The testamentary petition filed by Paras Khubilal Punamiya was called for direction on 6 May 2026. The court directed the petitioner's advocate to issue notices to non-consenting legal heirs through the Sheriff's office, file an Affidavit of Service, furnish an Administration Bond per Rule 421, and verify any cross-petitions filed. The matter was adjourned with liberty to move for final hearing after all compliance requirements are satisfied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case