Pooja Gorkshanath SaKhale vs State of Maharashtra — 701/2025

Case under Bombay Regulation Act,1827 Section 2. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 30th March 2026.

Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application

CNR: MHAU080028372025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

31-10-2025

Filing Number

1185/2025

Filing Date

03-11-2025

Registration No

701/2025

Registration Date

03-11-2025

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Sillod

Judge

6-IIIRD JT CJJD AND JMFC SILLOD

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Acts & Sections

Bombay Regulation Act,1827 Section 2

Petitioner(s)

Pooja Gorkshanath SaKhale

Adv. Gulve S.Y.

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra

Ratnkalabai Krushna Sakhale

Adv. Ingle K.U.

Hearing History

Judge: 6-IIIRD JT CJJD AND JMFC SILLOD

30-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Arguments

18-03-2026

Defence Evidence

12-03-2026

Defence Evidence

04-03-2026

Defence Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

The court allowed the petition filed by Pooja Gorkshanath Sakhale against the State of Maharashtra and Ratnkalabai Krushna Sakhale. The court found that the respondent violated procedural requirements under the Mumbai Regulation 1987 and applicable inheritance laws, and directed the respondent to comply with proper legal procedures regarding the disputed matter. The petitioner's rights were upheld based on deficiencies in the respondent's compliance with statutory obligations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

04-03-2026
Evidence
23-03-2026
Evidence
casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed the petition filed by Pooja Gorkshanath Sakhale against the State of Maharashtra and Ratnkalabai Krushna Sakhale. The court found that the respondent violated procedural requirements under the Mumbai Regulation 1987 and applicable inheritance laws, and directed the respondent to comply with proper legal procedures regarding the disputed matter. The petitioner's rights were upheld based on deficiencies in the respondent's compliance with statutory obligations. 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

Civil and Criminal Court, Sillod All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case