BRAHAM SINGH ALIAS BUNTY vs DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND ORS — CWP/11774/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 20-Apr-2026

CNR: PHHC010645022026

e-Filing Number

16-04-2026

Filing Number

CWP/22944/2026

Filing Date

17-Apr-2026

Registration No

CWP/11774/2026

Registration Date

17-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Coram

Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari

Bench Type

Single

Category

63.72 - MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS/SENIOR CITIZENS ( 764 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BRAHAM SINGH ALIAS BUNTY

    Adv. RAVI MALIK

  2. 2.Braham singh alias bunty

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND ORS

  2. 2.Braham singh alias bunty

  3. 3.Sub divisional magistrate cum chaiman

  4. 4.Gianchandi

  5. 5.Boby

  6. 6.Mahipal

  7. 7.Santosh

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Kuldeep TiwariView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP/11774/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana set aside orders dated 21.03.2023 and 02.12.2025 from the Maintenance Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, finding both were passed without proper legal composition (coram non judice). The Tribunal order was passed solely by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, violating the 2020 notification requiring three-member tribunals. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with proper tribunal constitution and full hearing to all parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/11774/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP/11774/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana set aside orders dated 21.03.2023 and 02.12.2025 from the Maintenance Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, finding both were passed without proper legal composition (coram non judice). The Tribunal order was passed solely by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, violating the 2020 notification requiring three-member tribunals. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with proper tribunal constitution and full hearing to all parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case