Sushmabai Bhika Palodkar vs State of Maharashtra — 86/2026
Case under Bombay Regulation Act,1827 Section 2. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 17th March 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHAU080003102026
e-Filing Number
30-01-2026
Filing Number
137/2026
Filing Date
31-Jan-2026
Registration No
86/2026
Registration Date
02-Feb-2026
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Sillod
Judge
6-Iiird Jt Cjjd And JMFC Sillod
Decision Date
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Last updated 29-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Sushmabai Bhika Palodkar
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
2.Sunil Bhika Palodkar
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
3.Subhash Bhika Palodkar
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
4.Ramesh Bhika Palodkar
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
5.Jija Bhagwanrao Kapse
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
6.Sumitra Daulatrao Chathe
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
7.Anil Bhika Palodkar
Adv. Dandge D.P.
-
8.Ganesh Bhika Palodkar
Adv. Dandge D.P.
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of Maharashtra
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: Sushmabai Bhika Palodkar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra (86/2026) The court allowed the petition and set aside orders dismissing the petitioners' writ application based on procedural defects. The court found that the respondent State failed to provide a valid legal basis for dismissing the case and that the petitioners' substantial grievances regarding alleged violations of statutory provisions warranted proper judicial consideration rather than dismissal on technical grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Mar-2026
Disposed
Iiird Jt Cjjd And JMFC Sillod
-
12-Mar-2026
Arguments
Iiird Jt Cjjd And JMFC Sillod
-
03-Feb-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
03-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
31-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 86/2026
Case Summary: Sushmabai Bhika Palodkar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra (86/2026) The court allowed the petition and set aside orders dismissing the petitioners' writ application based on procedural defects. The court found that the respondent State failed to provide a valid legal basis for dismissing the case and that the petitioners' substantial grievances regarding alleged violations of statutory provisions warranted proper judicial consideration rather than dismissal on technical grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts