NANDLAL BANSILAL BIDADA vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — CP/597/2018

Case under Constitution of India. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Aug-2018

CNR: HCBM030269272018

Filing Number

CP/21205/2018

Filing Date

21-Jul-2018

Registration No

CP/597/2018

Registration Date

08-Aug-2018

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More , Hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India
Contempt of Court Act

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NANDLAL BANSILAL BIDADA

    Adv. AWALE GIRISH L.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More,hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. ShindeView PDF

    The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the contempt petition filed by Nandlal Bansilal Bidada against the State of Maharashtra. The court accepted the intervenor's withdrawal of the pending civil application and noted that the respondent should have already decided on the petitioner's allotment of open space following a 2017 order, therefore disposing of the contempt petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2020

    Notification

    According To Sitting List

  4. 09-Aug-2018

    Hon'ble Shri Justice S V Gangapurwala,hon'ble Shri Justice Sunil K. KotwalView PDF

  5. 09-Aug-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 21-Jul-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. CP/597/2018

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the contempt petition filed by Nandlal Bansilal Bidada against the State of Maharashtra. The court accepted the intervenor's withdrawal of the pending civil application and noted that the respondent should have already decided on the petitioner's allotment of open space following a 2017 order, therefore disposing of the contempt petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case