KISHOR RAKHMAJI DHANWATE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS — WP/3960/2020

Case under Mah.cons.of Holding & Prev.& Frag.act Section 226. Next hearing: 14th July 2026.

CNR: HCBM030069652020

Next Hearing

14th July 2026

Filing Number

WP/5458/2020

Filing Date

10-02-2020

Registration No

WP/3960/2020

Registration Date

11-03-2020

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. B. SURYAWANSHI , HON'BLE JUSTICE VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. B. SURYAWANSHI , HON'BLE JUSTICE VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV

Bench Type

Division

Category

LAND LAWS AND AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES ( 21 )

Sub-Category

AGRICULTURAL LAND CEILING ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Acts & Sections

Mah.cons.of Holding & Prev.& Frag.act Section 226

Petitioner(s)

KISHOR RAKHMAJI DHANWATE

Adv. Advocate- ,Kale Ajeet B.

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Adv. K.D. BADE PATIL FOR R.NO. 5,AGP FOR R.NO 1 TO 4 1123

THE COLLECTOR

THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER

THE TAHSILDAR

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. B. SURYAWANSHI , HON'BLE JUSTICE VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV

11-06-2020

PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS

12-03-2020

PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS

14-07-2026
14-03-2026

AWAIT NOTICES CIVIL SIDE MATTERS

27-01-2026

URGENT ORDERS (CIVIL)

Orders

26-07-2023
05-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. B. SURYAWANSHI,HON'BLE JUSTICE VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV

Case Summary: The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) adjourned WP 3960/2020 to 14.07.2026. The petitioner's advocate must remove office objections within six weeks or the petition will be dismissed by default. Respondent No.5's advocate was granted time to file a reply. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) adjourned WP 3960/2020 to 14.07.2026. The petitioner's advocate must remove office objections within six weeks or the petition will be dismissed by default. Respondent No.5's advocate was granted time to file a reply. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case