Mohammad Ghouse vs K. Balaian — CRP/3679/2025

Case under Constitution of India Section 227. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 31st October 2025.

Case disposed

CNR: HBHC010574672025

Filing Number

CRP/42872/2025

Filing Date

20-Sep-2025

Registration No

CRP/3679/2025

Registration Date

09-Oct-2025

Judge

P.sam Koshy

Coram

P.sam Koshy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRP ( 9 )

Sub-Category

ARTICLE 227 ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL Section

Decision Date

31-Oct-2025

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 13-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Mohammad Ghouse

    Adv. PARTY IN PERSON

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.K. Balaian

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    P.sam KoshyView PDF

    The Telangana High Court granted a 90-day extension (instead of the requested 6 months) to the VII Junior Civil Judge to finalize execution petition no. 42 of 2011, considering the case's complicated history involving nine rejected claim petitions. The Court held that the extension cannot exceed the original 90-day timeframe previously granted, and directed the executing court to complete the proceedings within this final period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    P.sam KoshyView PDF

  4. 31-Oct-2025

    P.sam KoshyView PDF

  5. 31-Oct-2025

    Specially Mentioned Cases

    P.sam Koshy

  6. 24-Oct-2025

    Specially Mentioned Cases - 1

    P.sam Koshy

  7. 17-Oct-2025

    Fresh Admission

    P.sam Koshy

  8. 10-Oct-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 20-Sep-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRP/3679/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The Telangana High Court granted a 90-day extension (instead of the requested 6 months) to the VII Junior Civil Judge to finalize execution petition no. 42 of 2011, considering the case's complicated history involving nine rejected claim petitions. The Court held that the extension cannot exceed the original 90-day timeframe previously granted, and directed the executing court to complete the proceedings within this final period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case