Prakash Trimbak Deshmukh vs No One — 1/2026
Case under Bombay Regulation Act,1827 Section 2. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 09th March 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHRG080000172026
e-Filing Number
06-01-2026
Filing Number
4/2026
Filing Date
06-01-2026
Registration No
1/2026
Registration Date
06-01-2026
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C., Khalpuar
Judge
1-1 Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Khalpuar
Decision Date
09th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Prakash Trimbak Deshmukh
Adv. Modak Vinit Vivek
Sashikala Dashrath Deshmukh
Adv. Modak Vinit Vivek
Bhavna Sanjay Deshmukh
Adv. Modak Vinit Vivek
Sanjay Trimbak Deshmukh
Adv. Modak Vinit Vivek
Respondent(s)
No One
Hearing History
Judge: 1-1 Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Khalpuar
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Public Notice/Proclamation
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 12-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 06-01-2026 | Public Notice/Proclamation |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Civil Court at Khalapur granted the petition under the Bombay Regulation Act, 1827, Section 8, declaring Prakash Tribhuvan Deshmukh and three others as legal heirs of their deceased mother Sulbha Tribhuvan Deshmukh (died 10.09.2016) and ordered issuance of a Heirship Certificate in their names for government and semi-government purposes. The court found that the applicants were the only heirs, public notice was properly published without objection, and their sworn statements established their claim to heirship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Civil Court at Khalapur granted the petition under the Bombay Regulation Act, 1827, Section 8, declaring Prakash Tribhuvan Deshmukh and three others as legal heirs of their deceased mother Sulbha Tribhuvan Deshmukh (died 10.09.2016) and ordered issuance of a Heirship Certificate in their names for government and semi-government purposes. The court found that the applicants were the only heirs, public notice was properly published without objection, and their sworn statements established their claim to heirship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts