CHANDRAMUNI KAMAJI HINGOLE ADV AMIT ARUNKUMAR MUKHEDKAR vs PADAMSINGH VITHAL JANAKWADE AND ANOTHER — SA/264/2026
Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order) Section 100. Next hearing: 07th July 2026.
CNR: HCBM030186042026
Next Hearing
07th July 2026
e-Filing Number
05-05-2026
Filing Number
SA/13841/2026
Filing Date
06-05-2026
Registration No
SA/264/2026
Registration Date
06-05-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MEHROZ K. PATHAN
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MEHROZ K. PATHAN
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
CHANDRAMUNI KAMAJI HINGOLE ADV AMIT ARUNKUMAR MUKHEDKAR
Respondent(s)
PADAMSINGH VITHAL JANAKWADE AND ANOTHER
Vithalrao s/o Tukaram Janakwade
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MEHROZ K. PATHAN
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
FOR ORDERS
FOR ORDERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
| 07-07-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
| 07-07-2026 | FOR ORDERS |
Orders
Case Summary: SA 264/2026 The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) admitted a second appeal by Chandramuni Kamaji Hingole challenging the District Judge's decision that reversed the trial court's judgment. The trial court had dismissed a suit seeking cancellation of a 1990 sale deed and allowed the appellant's counter-claim for possession. The appellate court reversed this, prompting the High Court to issue notice returnable on 07.07.2026. The court identified substantial questions of law regarding whether the appellate findings were perverse and whether judgment was legally tenable given the registered sale deed remains unset aside. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: SA 264/2026 The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) admitted a second appeal by Chandramuni Kamaji Hingole challenging the District Judge's decision that reversed the trial court's judgment. The trial court had dismissed a suit seeking cancellation of a 1990 sale deed and allowed the appellant's counter-claim for possession. The appellate court reversed this, prompting the High Court to issue notice returnable on 07.07.2026. The court identified substantial questions of law regarding whether the appellate findings were perverse and whether judgment was legally tenable given the registered sale deed remains unset aside. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts