ATUL PRABHAKAR KULKARNI AND OTHERS vs VANDANA KRUSHNA AND OTHERS — CP/608/2018

Case under Constitution of India Section 215. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 20-Aug-2018

CNR: HCBM030305762018

Filing Number

CP/24173/2018

Filing Date

10-Aug-2018

Registration No

CP/608/2018

Registration Date

14-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

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 215
Mah.zp & Panchayat Samities Act 1961
Contempt of Court Act

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ATUL PRABHAKAR KULKARNI AND OTHERS

    Adv. DESHMUKH VAIBHAV P

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.VANDANA KRUSHNA AND OTHERS

    Adv. ,AGHAV AVINASH D 1123

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-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 continuation petition as the petitioner's relief had already been granted. Respondent No. 2's counsel confirmed that one-time increment had been awarded to the petitioner, rendering the petition moot. The court found no surviving issues and closed the 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. 20-Aug-2018

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,hon'ble Shri Justice Manish PitaleView PDF

  5. 20-Aug-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 10-Aug-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. CP/608/2018

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the continuation petition as the petitioner's relief had already been granted. Respondent No. 2's counsel confirmed that one-time increment had been awarded to the petitioner, rendering the petition moot. The court found no surviving issues and closed the 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