Dnyanoba Vitthal Mule vs Nil — 67/2026
Case under Bombay Regulation Act,1827 Section Heirship. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 05th May 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHBI130002692026
e-Filing Number
29-01-2026
Filing Number
85/2026
Filing Date
30-Jan-2026
Registration No
67/2026
Registration Date
31-Jan-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Parli
Judge
3-Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
Decision Date
05-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Last updated 25-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Dnyanoba Vitthal Mule
Adv. AGHAV LAXMAN PRABHAKAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.Nil
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-May-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Summary The court granted the applicant Jnanoba Vitthol Mulhe's petition for a succession certificate under the Bombay Regulation Act, 1827. The court found that the applicant is the sole legal heir of the deceased Gangaram P. Kanu Mulhe (who died on 06/04/2011), as the deceased had no other living heirs, and ordered the issuance of a succession certificate after payment of court fees. No objections were received during the public notice period, and the documentary and testimonial evidence established the applicant's status as the rightful heir. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-May-2026
Disposed
Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
-
13-Apr-2026
Order on Exh
Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
-
27-Mar-2026
Evidence
Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
-
12-Mar-2026
Compliance
Cjjd And JMFC Parli Vaijnath
-
31-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 67/2026
Summary The court granted the applicant Jnanoba Vitthol Mulhe's petition for a succession certificate under the Bombay Regulation Act, 1827. The court found that the applicant is the sole legal heir of the deceased Gangaram P. Kanu Mulhe (who died on 06/04/2011), as the deceased had no other living heirs, and ordered the issuance of a succession certificate after payment of court fees. No objections were received during the public notice period, and the documentary and testimonial evidence established the applicant's status as the rightful heir. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts