PRALHAD VITHALRAO ZUNGURE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — CP/815/2018
Case under Constitution of India. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030413762018
Filing Number
CP/32673/2018
Filing Date
22-Oct-2018
Registration No
CP/815/2018
Registration Date
01-Nov-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
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 15-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PRALHAD VITHALRAO ZUNGURE
Adv. THOMBRE CHANDRAKANT V.
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandipkumar C. More,hon'ble Shri Justice Abasaheb D. ShindeView PDF
The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad disposed of petitioner Pralhad Vithalrao Zungure's contempt petition (CP/815/2018) on the grounds that the underlying decision must have been implemented based on the petitioner's own 2012 proposal, leaving no surviving issue for adjudication. The court found no cause to continue the proceedings and accordingly disposed of the contempt petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Mar-2020
Petitions For Admission - After Notice [Civil Side Matters]
According To Sitting List
-
04-Feb-2019
Hon'ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. GavhaneView PDF
-
04-Feb-2019
Petitions For Admission - Fresh - CIVIL Side Matters
Hon'ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Gavhane
-
21-Nov-2018
Hon'ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,hon'ble Shri Justice Mangesh S. PatilView PDF
-
21-Nov-2018
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
22-Oct-2018
Case filed
Registration No. CP/815/2018
The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad disposed of petitioner Pralhad Vithalrao Zungure's contempt petition (CP/815/2018) on the grounds that the underlying decision must have been implemented based on the petitioner's own 2012 proposal, leaving no surviving issue for adjudication. The court found no cause to continue the proceedings and accordingly disposed of the contempt petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts