Supriya Rahul Vadgure vs Rahul Tukaram Vadgure Advocate - Annamma Garvasis — 2/2024
Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 12. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
PWDVA Appln. - Application under Domestic Violence Act
CNR: MHGA090000242024
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
e-Filing Number
17-01-2024
Filing Number
18/2024
Filing Date
18-01-2024
Registration No
2/2024
Registration Date
18-01-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Chamorshi
Judge
10-Jt. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Chamorshi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Supriya Rahul Vadgure
Adv. LODALLIWAR NITESH UMAKANT
Abhira Rahul Vadgure
Adv. LODALLIWAR NITESH UMAKANT
Respondent(s)
Rahul Tukaram Vadgure Advocate - Annamma Garvasis
Hearing History
Judge: 10-Jt. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Chamorshi
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-12-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary of Case 2/2024 The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chamorshi partly allowed the domestic violence application filed by Supriya Rahul Wadgure and her child against husband Rahul Tukaram Wadgure. The court found prima-facie evidence of domestic violence and economic abuse, establishing the applicants as aggrieved persons. The court ordered the respondent to pay monthly interim maintenance of Rs. 3,000 to the wife and Rs. 1,000 to the child from the date of the order, and issued a temporary protection order prohibiting further acts of domestic violence. The request to restrain property alienation was denied due to insufficient evidence of any claimed share in the respondent's property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 2/2024 The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chamorshi partly allowed the domestic violence application filed by Supriya Rahul Wadgure and her child against husband Rahul Tukaram Wadgure. The court found prima-facie evidence of domestic violence and economic abuse, establishing the applicants as aggrieved persons. The court ordered the respondent to pay monthly interim maintenance of Rs. 3,000 to the wife and Rs. 1,000 to the child from the date of the order, and issued a temporary protection order prohibiting further acts of domestic violence. The request to restrain property alienation was denied due to insufficient evidence of any claimed share in the respondent's property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts