ROBU SK vs MULUK CHAND SK — 124/2024

Case under West Bengal Land Reformation Act Section 8. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 31st July 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 31-Jul-2026 this date has passed

Misc(lr)

CNR: WBMD110004502024

Filing Number

702/2024

Filing Date

19-Dec-2024

Registration No

124/2024

Registration Date

19-Dec-2024

Court

Civil Judge Junior Division, Jangipur,Murshidabad

Judge

8-Civil Judge Jr Div I

Last updated 06-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

West Bengal Land Reformation Act Section 8

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ROBU SK

    Adv. MIRZA NASHIRUDDIN

  2. 2.MEKAIL SK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MULUK CHAND SK

Case History

  1. 31-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 20-May-2026

    OrderView PDF

    In Misc LR 124-24 (WBMD11-450-2024), the case between ROBU SK and MEKAIL SK (petitioners) against MULUK CHAND SK was adjourned by order dated 20.05.2026. The court fixed the case for evidence on 31.07.2026, with both the opposite party (OP) and petitioner appearing before the court. The adjournment was necessitated due to the learned presiding officer being on leave. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-May-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  5. 20-Dec-2025

    OrderView PDF

  6. 20-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  7. 17-Nov-2025

    OrderView PDF

  8. 17-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  9. 20-Aug-2025

    OrderView PDF

  10. 20-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  11. 19-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  12. 17-Mar-2025

    Sr

    Civil Judge Jr Div I

  13. 19-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  14. 19-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 124/2024

casestatus.in Summary

In Misc LR 124-24 (WBMD11-450-2024), the case between ROBU SK and MEKAIL SK (petitioners) against MULUK CHAND SK was adjourned by order dated 20.05.2026. The court fixed the case for evidence on 31.07.2026, with both the opposite party (OP) and petitioner appearing before the court. The adjournment was necessitated due to the learned presiding officer being on leave. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case