NARAHARI BUILDERS THR ITS BUSINESS PARTNER ANIL V SONAWANE AND ANR vs ARJUN JAGANNATH SALUNKE AND ANR — WP/5776/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226 AND 227. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

Next hearing 15-Jun-2026

CNR: HCBM030175652026

Filing Number

WP/13062/2026

Filing Date

29-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/5776/2026

Registration Date

10-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice S. G. Chapalgaonkar

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice S. G. Chapalgaonkar

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226 AND 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NARAHARI BUILDERS THR ITS BUSINESS PARTNER ANIL V SONAWANE AND ANR

    Adv. NAIK THIGLE GIRISH K

  2. 2.LALITA ARJUN SALUNKE

  3. 3.SHRI NARHARI BUILDER THROUG ITS BUSINESS PARTNER

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ARJUN JAGANNATH SALUNKE AND ANR

Case History

  1. 15-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice S. G. ChapalgaonkarView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench, heard Writ Petition No. 5776 of 2026 filed by Narahari Builders against Arjun Jagannath Salunke on June 15, 2026. The court issued notice to the respondents with a returnable date of July 6, 2026, and permitted the petitioners to serve respondents through private modes in addition to regular service, requiring an affidavit of service by the returnable date. The case was adjourned for substantive hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Jun-2026

    Petitions For Admission - Fresh CIVIL Side Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice S. G. Chapalgaonkar

  4. 29-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/5776/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench, heard Writ Petition No. 5776 of 2026 filed by Narahari Builders against Arjun Jagannath Salunke on June 15, 2026. The court issued notice to the respondents with a returnable date of July 6, 2026, and permitted the petitioners to serve respondents through private modes in addition to regular service, requiring an affidavit of service by the returnable date. The case was adjourned for substantive hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case