RITUJA SUKUMAR RANE vs SUKUMAR DATTATRAY RANE alias SUKUMAR DATTATRE RANE — MPT/635/2026
Case under Bombay Regulation Act Viii of 1827 Section 2. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OFF on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM020164112026
e-Filing Number
04-05-2026
Filing Number
MPT/16410/2026
Filing Date
05-May-2026
Registration No
MPT/635/2026
Registration Date
13-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Milind N. Jadhav
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Milind N. Jadhav
Bench Type
Single
Category
PERSONAL LAW ( 31 )
Sub-Category
HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE. ( 9 )
Judicial Branch
Original
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 21-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RITUJA SUKUMAR RANE
Adv. RAMCHANDRA RANE
Respondent(s)
-
1.SUKUMAR DATTATRAY RANE alias SUKUMAR DATTATRE RANE
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-Jun-2026
For Signing Grant
Shri. A. H. Laddhad(Prothonotary Senior Master)
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Milind N. JadhavView PDF
The Bombay High Court granted Rituja Sukumar Rane's petition for issuance of a legal heirship certificate under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 for the properties and credits of deceased Sukumar Dattatray Rane. The court found no impediment to allowing the petition, particularly given the consent affidavit filed by co-heir Oankar Sukumar Rane. The Department was directed to issue the certificate within 3 weeks, subject to removal of any office objections. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MPT/635/2026
The Bombay High Court granted Rituja Sukumar Rane's petition for issuance of a legal heirship certificate under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 for the properties and credits of deceased Sukumar Dattatray Rane. The court found no impediment to allowing the petition, particularly given the consent affidavit filed by co-heir Oankar Sukumar Rane. The Department was directed to issue the certificate within 3 weeks, subject to removal of any office objections. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts