M/S. JAIN STEEL PRANJALI M. BHANDARI vs MENON METALLIKS PVT. LTD. CO., AND ORS Advocate - AMIT B BORKAR, RES NO. 2,RES NO. 3,AMIT B BORKAR — APEAL/781/2017

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM070406292017

Filing Number

APEAL/786/2017

Filing Date

15-Sep-2017

Registration No

APEAL/781/2017

Registration Date

16-Sep-2017

Bench Type

Single

Category

CRIMINAL ( 9 )

Sub-Category

AGAINST ORDER OF ACQUITTAL ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S. JAIN STEEL PRANJALI M. BHANDARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MENON METALLIKS PVT. LTD. CO., AND ORS Advocate - AMIT B BORKAR, RES NO. 2,RES NO. 3,AMIT B BORKAR

  2. 2.KARKATTAVALLI KURUP PARMESHWARAN

    Adv. surel sunil shah

  3. 3.ROHIT KARKATTAVALLI PARMESHWARAN

    Adv. surel sunil shah

  4. 4.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Pravin Sheshrao Patil,national Lok AdalatView PDF

    Case Summary: CR. APPEAL NO. 781 OF 2017 M/s. Jain Steel's criminal appeal before the National Lok Adalat (High Court of Bombay, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur) on 9th May 2026 resulted in adjournment. The appellant appeared in person and notified respondents of the hearing, but respondents failed to appear by 1:00 p.m., demonstrating disinterest in settlement. The court ordered the matter to be listed before the regular court for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Sep-2017

    Case filed

    Registration No. APEAL/781/2017

  4. 01-Sep-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 01-Sep-2017

    Notification

    Hon'ble Shri Justice A.M. Badar

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CR. APPEAL NO. 781 OF 2017 M/s. Jain Steel's criminal appeal before the National Lok Adalat (High Court of Bombay, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur) on 9th May 2026 resulted in adjournment. The appellant appeared in person and notified respondents of the hearing, but respondents failed to appear by 1:00 p.m., demonstrating disinterest in settlement. The court ordered the matter to be listed before the regular court for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case