KISHOR M. RAJADHYAKSHA vs MUMBAI BLDG. REPAIRS AND RECONSTRUCTION BOARD TH. ITS CHIEF OFFICER — HCBM20111362026

Case under Housing and Area Development Act (Maharashtra) Section 226. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

Next hearing 16-Jun-2026

CNR: HCBM020111362026

Filing Number

WP/11136/2026

Filing Date

27-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Modak

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Modak

Bench Type

Division

Category

TOWN PLANNING ( 39 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Housing and Area Development Act (Maharashtra) Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KISHOR M. RAJADHYAKSHA

    Adv. Sudhanva S Bedekar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MUMBAI BLDG. REPAIRS AND RECONSTRUCTION BOARD TH. ITS CHIEF OFFICER

  2. 2.CHAITANYA DEVELOPERS TH. ITS PARTNER PRADIP CHOPRA

Case History

  1. 16-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Modak

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik,hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. ModakView PDF

    Summary: The Bombay High Court issued notice to respondents in this writ petition filed by Kishor M. Rajadhyaksha against the Mumbai Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board. The case was adjourned with notice returnable on 16th June 2026, with service of notice waived for respondent No.1 and private notice permitted for respondent No.2. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 15-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 27-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Bombay High Court issued notice to respondents in this writ petition filed by Kishor M. Rajadhyaksha against the Mumbai Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board. The case was adjourned with notice returnable on 16th June 2026, with service of notice waived for respondent No.1 and private notice permitted for respondent No.2. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case