Bainabai Anna Mhaske Deceased(Legal Heir) vs District Collector Satara Advocate - Kulkarni Mahesh N. — 156/2025
Case under Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 06th March 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHST010027522025
e-Filing Number
05-11-2025
Filing Number
1999/2025
Filing Date
29-10-2025
Registration No
156/2025
Registration Date
10-11-2025
Court
District and Sessions Court , Satara
Judge
5-Ad-hoc District Judge -1 Satara
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bainabai Anna Mhaske Deceased(Legal Heir)
Adv. Bhatia Rahul R.1.
Balu Anna Mahske
Adv. BHATIA RAHUL RAJESH
Respondent(s)
District Collector Satara Advocate - Kulkarni Mahesh N.
Chief Conservator of Forest (Regional)
Deputy Conservator of Forest
Hearing History
Judge: 5-Ad-hoc District Judge -1 Satara
Disposed
Hearing
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Awaiting Notice
Awaiting Notice
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-02-2026 | Hearing |
| 21-01-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 03-01-2026 | Awaiting Notice |
| 21-11-2025 | Awaiting Notice |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court allowed the application for condonation of delay and permitted the filing of a Regular Civil Appeal 2 days late, subject to payment of Rs. 200 as costs to the District Legal Services Authority within 15 days. The court found that while the applicant's explanation of "misunderstandings" was minimal, the circumstances and nature of litigation warranted granting the opportunity to appeal in the interest of justice, though it emphasized that "sufficient cause" requires reasonable explanation and cannot be liberally interpreted when negligence is involved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court allowed the application for condonation of delay and permitted the filing of a Regular Civil Appeal 2 days late, subject to payment of Rs. 200 as costs to the District Legal Services Authority within 15 days. The court found that while the applicant's explanation of "misunderstandings" was minimal, the circumstances and nature of litigation warranted granting the opportunity to appeal in the interest of justice, though it emphasized that "sufficient cause" requires reasonable explanation and cannot be liberally interpreted when negligence is involved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts