JAYA TALAKSHI CHHEDA (MOTHER OF DECEASED HITESSH SURESH BHAGAT) DEVANG H. SHAH vs HITESH SURESH BHAGAT (SINCE DECEASED THRUGH L R DEF NO — APP/118/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 07th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020333992025

Filing Number

APP/33399/2025

Filing Date

14-Oct-2025

Registration No

APP/118/2025

Registration Date

26-Nov-2025

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. Ankhad

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. Ankhad

Bench Type

Division

Category

CIVIL APPEALS ( 45 )

Sub-Category

Division Bench Matters ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

07-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 24-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAYA TALAKSHI CHHEDA (MOTHER OF DECEASED HITESSH SURESH BHAGAT) DEVANG H. SHAH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HITESH SURESH BHAGAT (SINCE DECEASED THRUGH L R DEF NO

  2. 2.SUHAS MAHADEO ROGE

  3. 3.LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

  4. 4.PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

  5. 5.BANK OF INDIA

  6. 6.UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH POST MASTER

  7. 7.VANDANA RAMESH MOTA

  8. 8.JAYANTILAL KALYANJI BHAGAT

  9. 9.VINOD KALYANI BHAGAT

  10. 10.TANUJA JAYANTILALBHAGAT

  11. 11.SAHAJ DEVELOPERS

  12. 12.BIPINCHANDRA BAWABHAI PATEL

  13. 13.VIPULKUMAR NARENDRABHAI NAIK

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. AnkhadView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the Single Judge's order that had indefinitely adjourned proceedings in a property dispute case. The court held that receiver applications under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code must proceed despite an ongoing related criminal appeal, as halting all proceedings risks parties unlawfully disposing of contested assets. Accordingly, the court appointed the High Court Receiver to take symbolic possession of all suit properties while allowing current possessors to act as the Receiver's agents, with costs shared equally. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Apr-2026

    High On Board (Hob)

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. Ankhad

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. AnkhadView PDF

  5. 02-Apr-2026

    Due Admission - 1

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. Ankhad

  6. 26-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. AnkhadView PDF

  7. 26-Mar-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. Ankhad

  8. 12-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. AnkhadView PDF

  9. 12-Mar-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. Ankhad

  10. 05-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam A. AnkhadView PDF

  11. 11-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice B.P. Colabawalla,hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Satyavan JamsandekarView PDF

  12. 11-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  13. 14-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. APP/118/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the Single Judge's order that had indefinitely adjourned proceedings in a property dispute case. The court held that receiver applications under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code must proceed despite an ongoing related criminal appeal, as halting all proceedings risks parties unlawfully disposing of contested assets. Accordingly, the court appointed the High Court Receiver to take symbolic possession of all suit properties while allowing current possessors to act as the Receiver's agents, with costs shared equally. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case