Amar Nath Mishra vs Mahesh Dubey — 8/2023

Case under Guardian Wards Act Section 7 (i) b, 10. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 05-May-2026

GUARDIANSHIP

CNR: BRBU100100682023

Filing Number

849/2023

Filing Date

18-Dec-2023

Registration No

8/2023

Registration Date

18-Dec-2023

Court

DJ Div. Buxar

Judge

2-Principal Judge, Family Court

Last updated 25-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Guardian Wards Act Section 7 (i) b, 10

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Amar Nath Mishra

    Adv. Laxman Jee Rai

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Mahesh Dubey

  2. 2.Sonawati Devi

Case History

  1. 05-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 22-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  3. 13-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  4. 19-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  7. 12-Feb-2026

    Copy of orderView PDF

    Summary: The court rejected the respondent's preliminary objection to jurisdiction filed under CPC Rule 11, Order 7, finding that the court has territorial jurisdiction over the guardianship case. The petitioner (father Amarnath Mishra) filed the guardianship petition for four minor children in 2023; while three children were born in Dhanbad and one in Baksar district, all are being maintained in Dhanbad where the respondent resides. The court held that since evidence has already commenced and the case is substantively proceeding, the jurisdiction question should be decided on merits rather than through a preliminary objection, and ordered the case to continue with cross-examination of witness scheduled for March 10, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  8. 12-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  9. 06-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  10. 25-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  11. 20-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  12. 13-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  13. 10-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  14. 12-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  15. 31-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  16. 24-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  17. 18-Jul-2025

    Issues

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  18. 02-Jul-2025

    Issues

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  19. 23-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  20. 16-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  21. 27-May-2025

    Issues

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  22. 05-May-2025

    Issues

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  23. 07-Apr-2025

    Issues

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  24. 18-Mar-2025

    W.S

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  25. 23-Jan-2025

    W.S

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  26. 20-Dec-2024

    W.S

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  27. 04-Oct-2024

    Appearence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  28. 14-Aug-2024

    Appearence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  29. 12-Jul-2024

    Appearence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  30. 28-Jun-2024

    Appearence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  31. 08-Apr-2024

    Appearence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  32. 06-Mar-2024

    Appearence

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  33. 05-Mar-2024

    Siristedar Report

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  34. 22-Feb-2024

    Siristedar Report

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  35. 22-Jan-2024

    Siristedar Report

    Principal Judge, Family Court

  36. 23-Dec-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  37. 18-Dec-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 8/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court rejected the respondent's preliminary objection to jurisdiction filed under CPC Rule 11, Order 7, finding that the court has territorial jurisdiction over the guardianship case. The petitioner (father Amarnath Mishra) filed the guardianship petition for four minor children in 2023; while three children were born in Dhanbad and one in Baksar district, all are being maintained in Dhanbad where the respondent resides. The court held that since evidence has already commenced and the case is substantively proceeding, the jurisdiction question should be decided on merits rather than through a preliminary objection, and ordered the case to continue with cross-examination of witness scheduled for March 10, 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case