CONCEICAO FERNANDES vs COMMUNIDADE OF CORTALIM AND 3 ORS — CA/41/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

Next hearing 12-Jun-2026

CNR: HCBM050012952019

Filing Number

STA/1272/2019

Filing Date

27-Mar-2019

Registration No

CA/41/2023

Registration Date

27-Mar-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Valmiki Menezes

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Valmiki Menezes

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

JUDICIAL SECTION

Last updated 28-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CONCEICAO FERNANDES

    Adv. IVAN SANTIMANO, ,IVAN SANTIMANO,VISHAL K. NAIK,SHAILESH REDKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.COMMUNIDADE OF CORTALIM AND 3 ORS

  2. 2.ADMINISTRATOR OF COMMUNIDADES

  3. 3.STATE OF GOA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR

  4. 4.STATE OF GOA THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

Case History

  1. 12-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 12-Jun-2026

    For Orders

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Valmiki Menezes

  3. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Valmiki MenezesView PDF

    The case was adjourned. The High Court of Bombay at Goa listed the matter for hearing on 12.06.2026 at the request of the respondent's advocate. The court also directed the registry to ensure proper recording of the advocate's name against Respondent No.1. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 19-Jul-2023

    For Orders

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik

  5. 22-Jun-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. KarnikView PDF

  6. 22-Jun-2023

    For Orders

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik

  7. 08-Jun-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. KarnikView PDF

  8. 20-Apr-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 16-Aug-2019

    RegistrarView PDF

  10. 26-Jul-2019

    RegistrarView PDF

  11. 27-Mar-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. CA/41/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The case was adjourned. The High Court of Bombay at Goa listed the matter for hearing on 12.06.2026 at the request of the respondent's advocate. The court also directed the registry to ensure proper recording of the advocate's name against Respondent No.1. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case