Raghotamma S/o Parushurama Kodate vs Pritikha W/o Raghotamma Kodate — 27/2025

Case under U/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act 1956 Section 9. Status: EVIDENCE-CIVIL. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.

M.C. - MATRIMONIAL CASES

CNR: KAKB310002102025

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

Next Hearing

11th June 2026

e-Filing Number

01-07-2025

Filing Number

27/2025

Filing Date

03-07-2025

Registration No

27/2025

Registration Date

03-07-2025

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AFZALPUR

Judge

974-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and J.M.F.C. ,AFZALPUR.

Acts & Sections

U/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act 1956 Section 9

Petitioner(s)

Raghotamma S/o Parushurama Kodate

Adv. Anilkumar Jamadar

Respondent(s)

Pritikha W/o Raghotamma Kodate

Hearing History

Judge: 974-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE and J.M.F.C. ,AFZALPUR.

04-06-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

29-04-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

22-04-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

02-04-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

Interim Orders

12-11-2025
Deposition
09-12-2025
Deposition
19-02-2026
Deposition

Summary of Case 27/2025 In this matrimonial dispute heard on 19-02-2026, petitioner Raghotamma alleged that his wife Pritikha abandoned him after only one month of marriage (solemnized 29-11-2024) and returned to her parents' home without his knowledge. He claimed he had made settlement offers through counsel seeking reconciliation. The respondent filed a reply denying the allegations. The court recorded the petitioner's statement affirming his willingness for reconciliation and noted that the respondent was also willing to resume cohabitation. No final order/verdict was issued; the case was adjourned for further proceedings with witness examination scheduled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 27/2025 In this matrimonial dispute heard on 19-02-2026, petitioner Raghotamma alleged that his wife Pritikha abandoned him after only one month of marriage (solemnized 29-11-2024) and returned to her parents' home without his knowledge. He claimed he had made settlement offers through counsel seeking reconciliation. The respondent filed a reply denying the allegations. The court recorded the petitioner's statement affirming his willingness for reconciliation and noted that the respondent was also willing to resume cohabitation. No final order/verdict was issued; the case was adjourned for further proceedings with witness examination scheduled. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AFZALPUR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case