Maan Kanwar vs Bacchi Bai — 60/2018
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7R1. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed otherwise on 19th March 2026.
Civil Suit
CNR: RJBD010030742018
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
597/2018
Filing Date
17-11-2018
Registration No
60/2018
Registration Date
17-11-2018
Court
DJ ADJ Bundi HQ
Judge
4-ADJ II
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Dismissed otherwise
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Maan Kanwar
Adv. Yogesh Yadav
Dhapu Bai
Madan Lal
Respondent(s)
Bacchi Bai
Hari Prakash
Jitendra Kumar
Kunj Bihari
Banwari
Ramesh
Kamla
Vimla
Chandra Prakash
Harimohan
Shanti
Mohni
Kanwar Lal
Mukesh
Jana
State
Hearing History
Judge: 4-ADJ II
Disposed
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings | |
| 10-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings | |
| 17-02-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings | |
| 29-01-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds for relief under Article 226. The court found that the petitioner's claim regarding deprivation of procedural rights and alleged violation of statutory provisions (Articles 11, 16, and 18) lacked merit, as the court determined there was no foundation for such allegations. Consequently, the petition was rejected as without merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds for relief under Article 226. The court found that the petitioner's claim regarding deprivation of procedural rights and alleged violation of statutory provisions (Articles 11, 16, and 18) lacked merit, as the court determined there was no foundation for such allegations. Consequently, the petition was rejected as without merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts