Mohammad Sharique Mohammad Ibrahim Sabjiwale vs Aarush Bhaji Bhandar Thro. Its Prop. Prashant Madhukarrao Chincholkar — 30/2026

Case under Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 07th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cri.M.A.

CNR: MHAK010007322026

e-Filing Number

12-02-2026

Filing Number

311/2026

Filing Date

12-Feb-2026

Registration No

30/2026

Registration Date

13-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Court , Akola

Judge

4-District Judge III Akola

Decision Date

07-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Last updated 25-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Limitation Act Section 5

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Mohammad Sharique Mohammad Ibrahim Sabjiwale

    Adv. SHAH KALU SHAH BISMILLA SHAH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Aarush Bhaji Bhandar Thro. Its Prop. Prashant Madhukarrao Chincholkar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    The court allowed the accused's application to condone a 28-day delay in filing an appeal against conviction, finding the delay reasonable given the accused's absence during judgment pronouncement. The court conditioned the condonation on the accused paying Rs. 5,000 as costs to the respondent, to be compensated for inconvenience and harassment caused by the accused's conduct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge III Akola

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Reply/Say

    District Judge III Akola

  5. 26-Feb-2026

    Reply/Say

    District Judge III Akola

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    Awaiting Notice

    District Judge III Akola

  7. 16-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 12-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 30/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed the accused's application to condone a 28-day delay in filing an appeal against conviction, finding the delay reasonable given the accused's absence during judgment pronouncement. The court conditioned the condonation on the accused paying Rs. 5,000 as costs to the respondent, to be compensated for inconvenience and harassment caused by the accused's conduct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case