Skip to main content
Summons Cases SW

HAJI BANNE HAJI YAKUB KHANVsAHMEDALI MOHD ALI +2 more

CNR MHMM18002784201832-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (FIRST CLASS), 32ND COURT
Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
CASE DISPOSED
Uncontested--Dismissed
Decision Date: 30th October 2018

TrustJury record updated 24 Sept 2026

Case Overview

Registration Number
27/2018
Registration Date
06 Feb 2018

Advocates

0

No advocate information is available in this record.

Parties

4

Petitioner

  1. 1HAJI BANNE HAJI YAKUB KHAN

Respondent

  1. 1AHMEDALI MOHD ALI
  2. 2RIHAYAT ALI AHMED ALI
  3. 3ALI HASAN AHMED ALI

Acts & Sections

1
Indian Penal Code · Sec 34 · 504 · 506II

Case History / Proceedings

Case History
Date: 07-04-2018
Reason For Adjournment: Court Vacant
Next Purpose: NOT HEARD CASES
Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2018

Date: 31-05-2018
Business: Complainant present.
Advocate Present.
Adj for consideration
Next Purpose: NOT HEARD CASES
Next Hearing Date: 03-08-2018

Date: 03-08-2018
Business: Complainant absent Advocate absent
Adj for consideration
Next Purpose: NOT HEARD CASES
Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2018

Date: 30-10-2018
Business: Complainant absent
Order passed below Exh-1
Case is dismissed, for want of prosecution on  the part of complainant
Nature Of Disposal: Dismissed
Disposal Date: 30-10-2018

Additional Case Details

Additional Case Details
Filing Number: 1673/2018
Filing Date: 05-02-2018
First Hearing Date: 07th April 2018
Decision Date: 30th October 2018
Court Number And Judge: 32-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (FIRST CLASS), 32ND COURT

Orders

1
Final Order 1
30 Oct 2018
Order Details: Copy of Interim Maintenance Order
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
32ND COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI.
C. C. No. 27/SW/2018
ORDER BELOW EXH.1
Perusal of record would indicate that, the complainant
remaining absent since filing of complaint. Moreover, no effective steps
has been taken on behalf of complainant for recording verification on
record. Therefore, no purpose would be served by keeping the case open
when the complainant have failed to prosecute the same in proper
perspective. Hence, I find that, this case can be disposed of. Hence, case
is dismissed, for want of prosecution on the part of complainant.
Sd/
Date : 30.10.2018
ssl.
(Sudhir N. Shinde)
Metropolitan Magistrate, 32nd Court,
Bandra, Mumbai.
-- 1 of 1 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.