Shlok Santosh Pawar vs State of Maharashtra — 79/2025

Case under Guardians and Wards Act Section 8(2). Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 28th March 2026.

Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application

CNR: MHAU160041122025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

18-07-2025

Filing Number

1989/2025

Filing Date

19-07-2025

Registration No

79/2025

Registration Date

19-07-2025

Court

Gangapur Dist and Sessions Court

Judge

1-District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Gangapur

Decision Date

28th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT Section 8(2)

Petitioner(s)

Shlok Santosh Pawar

Adv. JOSHI SANJAY RADHAKRISHNARAO

Sunita Santosh Pawar

Adv. JOSHI SANJAY RADHAKRISHNARAO

Respondent(s)

State of Maharashtra

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Gangapur

28-03-2026

Disposed

25-03-2026

Arguments

18-03-2026

Arguments

16-03-2026

Arguments

12-03-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

28-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: 79/2025 Court Decision: The court REJECTED the petition filed by Shlok Santosh Pawar (minor, 8 years old, through mother Sunita) and Sunita Santosh Pawar seeking permission to sell agricultural property (0.20 acres) registered in the minor child's name. The court held that while the mother sought to use sale proceeds for the child's education and welfare, the sale arrangement lacked proper legal safeguards—specifically, the sale agreement was notarized rather than registered under the Registration Act, failing to meet statutory requirements. The court concluded that permitting the sale would not adequately protect the minor's interests and welfare. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 79/2025 Court Decision: The court REJECTED the petition filed by Shlok Santosh Pawar (minor, 8 years old, through mother Sunita) and Sunita Santosh Pawar seeking permission to sell agricultural property (0.20 acres) registered in the minor child's name. The court held that while the mother sought to use sale proceeds for the child's education and welfare, the sale arrangement lacked proper legal safeguards—specifically, the sale agreement was notarized rather than registered under the Registration Act, failing to meet statutory requirements. The court concluded that permitting the sale would not adequately protect the minor's interests and welfare. 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

Gangapur Dist and Sessions Court All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case