SH. NAND KISHORESAXENA ,SR. CITIZEN vs SMT. MADHU SAXENA @ SUMAN SAXENA — 95/2022
Case under Declaration and Mandatory Injuction Section CPC. Disposed: Uncontested--DECREED on 17th March 2026.
CS - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ ADJ
CNR: DLNE010011092022
e-Filing Number
18-04-2022
Filing Number
419/2022
Filing Date
18-Apr-2022
Registration No
95/2022
Registration Date
02-May-2022
Court
District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD
Judge
429-District Judge
Decision Date
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DECREED
Last updated 17-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SH. NAND KISHORESAXENA ,SR. CITIZEN
Adv. NIPUN KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.SMT. MADHU SAXENA @ SUMAN SAXENA
-
2.RAKESH SAXENA
-
3.SUDHA SAXENA
-
4.JAI SINGH @ PAPPU
-
5.SAHIRA @ SAHEENN, NGO WORKER
-
6.STATION HOUSE OFFICER
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
Copy Of JudgmentView PDF
-
17-Mar-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
The court decreed the plaintiff's suit in favor of Sh. Nand Kishore Saxena. The court upheld that the court fees paid were lawful under the Court Fees Act, 1870, as the declaration reliefs sought fell under Schedule II Article 17(iii), entitling the plaintiff to pay fixed fees, while injunction reliefs had appropriate fees paid separately. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge
-
21-Feb-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
21-Feb-2026
Order
District Judge
-
06-Feb-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
06-Feb-2026
Order
District Judge
-
12-Jan-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
12-Jan-2026
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
27-Nov-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
27-Nov-2025
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
30-Oct-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
30-Oct-2025
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
09-Sep-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
09-Sep-2025
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
19-Aug-2025
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
02-Jul-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
02-Jul-2025
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
07-May-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
07-May-2025
Final Arguments
District Judge
-
04-Mar-2025
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
04-Mar-2025
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
District Judge
-
05-Dec-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
05-Dec-2024
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
District Judge
-
28-Oct-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
28-Oct-2024
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
03-Sep-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
03-Sep-2024
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
24-Jul-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
24-Jul-2024
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
04-May-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
04-May-2024
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
04-Mar-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
04-Mar-2024
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
03-Feb-2024
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
03-Feb-2024
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
05-Dec-2023
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
05-Dec-2023
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
10-Oct-2023
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
10-Oct-2023
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
29-Aug-2023
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
29-Aug-2023
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
19-Jul-2023
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
19-Jul-2023
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
02-May-2023
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
02-May-2023
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
20-Feb-2023
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
07-Nov-2022
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
07-Nov-2022
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
09-Sep-2022
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
09-Sep-2022
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
02-Jul-2022
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
02-Jul-2022
Misc. cases
District Judge
-
09-May-2022
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
09-May-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
18-Apr-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 95/2022
The court decreed the plaintiff's suit in favor of Sh. Nand Kishore Saxena. The court upheld that the court fees paid were lawful under the Court Fees Act, 1870, as the declaration reliefs sought fell under Schedule II Article 17(iii), entitling the plaintiff to pay fixed fees, while injunction reliefs had appropriate fees paid separately. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts