ROSHAN KAWDUJI DAKHANE vs KAJAL ROSHAN DAKHANE — 126/2025
Case under Hindu Marriage Act Section 13-1(ia)(ib). Status: Issues. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.
Marriage Petn.
CNR: MHNG190013672025
e-Filing Number
27-10-2025
Filing Number
1348/2025
Filing Date
01-Nov-2025
Registration No
126/2025
Registration Date
01-Nov-2025
Court
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
Judge
1-Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ROSHAN KAWDUJI DAKHANE
Adv. PANPALIYA RANJANA JUGALKISHOR
Respondent(s)
-
1.KAJAL ROSHAN DAKHANE
Case History
-
11-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
16-Apr-2026
Issues
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
14-Mar-2026
Issues
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
23-Feb-2026
Issues
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
04-Feb-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case 126/2025 Summary: Respondent Kajal Roshan Dakhane filed an application to set aside an ex-parte order dated 15.12.2025 passed against her, arguing she was absent on 01.12.2025 due to non-receipt of timely notice. The court allowed the application and set aside the ex-parte order, finding that notice was properly served, there was no inordinate delay in seeking relief, and the respondent filed her reply promptly, warranting an opportunity to be heard in the interests of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-Feb-2026
Issues
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
20-Jan-2026
Evidence
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
15-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
15-Dec-2025
Evidence
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
01-Dec-2025
Hearing
Civil Judge Senior Division Katol
-
04-Nov-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
04-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
01-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 126/2025
Case 126/2025 Summary: Respondent Kajal Roshan Dakhane filed an application to set aside an ex-parte order dated 15.12.2025 passed against her, arguing she was absent on 01.12.2025 due to non-receipt of timely notice. The court allowed the application and set aside the ex-parte order, finding that notice was properly served, there was no inordinate delay in seeking relief, and the respondent filed her reply promptly, warranting an opportunity to be heard in the interests of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts